State v. Cassidy’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently August 2007 · most notably State v. Ariegwe (2007), City of Billings v. Bruce (1998)
33 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Barker v. Wingo · United States v. Marion · Klopfer v. State of North Carolina · Strunk v. United States · State v. Steward
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““3. Defendant’s Assertion of the Right. “The State argues, in this regard, that defendant has failed to expedite the proceedings in this case through any active pleadings before the District Court, such as by requesting an earlier trial date. In addition, it is maintained that defendant’s motion to dismiss for denial of a speedy trial was untimely, and should have been made at some point between entry of plea and the setting of the trial date. The State does not specifically contend, however, that defendant in some manner waived his right to assert a denial of a speedy trial. “It is, of course, the general rule under the present state of the law that ‘. . . an accused must take some affirmative action to obtain a trial to be entitled to á discharge for delay.’ State v. Steward, 168 Mont. 390 , 543 P.2d 182 . Such burden is satisfied, however, by the making of an appropriate motion, discussed by this Court in Steward as follows: “ ‘The “appropriate motion” is a motion to dismiss for denial of a speedy trial. The proper time to assert the right to a speedy trial is prior to the actual commencement of the trial, usually at the time the trial date is set, or the time the case is called to trial . . .’ 168 Mont. 390 -91, 543 P.2d 182 . “Defendant’s assertion of the right in this case was in all respects proper under the standard outlined in Steward, having been made between the time the matter was set for trial and the trial date itself.” 578 P.2d at 739 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Puzio
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.