Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 193 Ariz. 137 - State v. Thorne

State v. Thorne’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
2
states following
February 2009
most recently cited

16 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Cook · 22 Ariz. App. 111 - State v. Parker · State v. Thompson · State v. Rutherford

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

  1. “Notwithstanding, defendant further argues that the maximum sentence was not categorically reduced because, despite the apparent agreement of the parties, unforeseen facts might have been adduced at trial that would have allowed the imposition of consecutive sentences for Counts 1 and 2. Again, we disagree____ The state was bound by that stipulation, and the trial court impliedly agreed by empanelling[em-panelingj an eight-person jury.”
    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.