Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 188 W. Va. 534 - State v. White

188 W. Va. 534 - State v. White’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

62 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably 194 W. Va. 97 - Tennant v. Marion Health Care Foundation, Inc. (1995), 202 W. Va. 228 - Ewing v. Board of Education (1998)

62 state decisions

360199220002010decided

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 159 W. Va. 108 - Smith v. State Workmen's Compensation Commissioner · 172 W. Va. 312 - State Ex Rel. Simpkins v. Harvey · 173 W. Va. 502 - State Ex Rel. Fetters v. Hott · 175 W. Va. 792 - Shell v. Bechtold · 64 W. Va. 659 - State v. Snyder

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

  1. “A statute should be so read and applied as to make it accord with the spirit, purposes and objects of the general system of law of which it is intended to form a part; it being presumed that the legislators who drafted and passed it were familiar with all existing law, applicable to the subject matter, whether constitutional, statutory or common, and intended the statute to harmonize completely with the same and aid in the effectuation of the general purpose and design thereof, if its terms are consistent therewith.”
    14 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[H]aving held that a court speaks through its orders, we are left to decide this case within the parameters of the circuit court's order.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “In addition the court may impose, subject to modification at any time, any other conditions which it may deem advisable, including, but not limited to, any of the following: (1) That he shall make restitution or reparation, in whole or in part, immediately or within the period of probation, to any party injured by the crime for which he has been convicted. (2) That he shall pay any fine assessed and the costs of the proceeding in such installments as the court may direct. (3) That he shall make contribution from his earnings, in such sums as the court may direct, for the support of his dependents. (4) That he shall, in the discretion of the court, be required to serve a period of confinement in the county jail of the county in which he was convicted for a period not to exceed one third of the minimum sentence established by law or one third of the least possible period of confinement in an indeterminate sentence, but in no ease shall such period of confinement exceed six consecutive months. The court shall have authority to sentence the defendant within such six-month period to intermittent periods of confinement including, but not limited to, weekends or holidays and may grant unto the defendant intermittent periods of release in order that he may work at his employment or for such other reasons or purposes as the court may deem appropriate: Provided, That the provisions of article eleven-a [§ 62-11A-1 et seq.] of this chapter shall not apply to such intermittent periods of ”
    2 later decisions 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.