Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 176 W. Va. 1 - State v. Bennett

176 W. Va. 1 - State v. Bennett’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
2
states following
November 2011
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently November 2011

17 state decisions

801985199020002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Jackson v. Denno · Local 408, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. National Labor Relations Board · Licensed Beverage Distributors Ass'n v. United States · 169 W. Va. 191 - State v. Hatfield

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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"Failure to Comply with a Request. — If at any time during the course of the proceedings it is brought to the attention of the court that a party has failed to comply with this rule, the court may order such party to permit the discovery or inspection, grant a continuance, or prohibit the party from introducing evidence not disclosed, or it may enter such other order as it deems just under the circumstances. The court may specify the time, place and manner of making the discovery and inspection and may prescribe such terms and conditions as are just.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “When a trial court grants a pre-trial discovery motion requiring the prosecution to disclose evidence in its possession, non-disclosure by the prosecution is fata! to its case where such non-disclosure is prejudicial. The non-disclosure is prejudicial where the defense is surprised on a material issue and where the failure to make the disclosure hampers the preparation and presentation of the defendant’s case.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “delayed presentment for the purpose of obtaining a separate confession.” We specifically found the delay in presentment”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.