State v. McCarther’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 state decisions

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

1. ““. . . where a defendant files no plea in abatement that he had no preliminary examination on one or more charges contained in the information, and thereafter is arraigned, pleads not guility, and goes to trial on the information, the subject of preliminary examination is no longer material . . . and objection by the defendant on appeal that he had no preliminary examination comes too late. . . .” (p. 671.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Pittman · State v. Ward

2. ““The foregoing procedural rules are salutary and serve a legitimate state interest. [Citation omitted.] Their purpose is designed to promote definiteness, fairness, and orderly procedure of criminal litigation, and they present no federal question. [Citation omitted.] When a plea in abatement is timely filed and the state responds with a proper pleading, evidence is introduced upon the issue and if the plea is overruled the ruling thereon is not appealable until final disposition of the case in the district court. [Citation omitted.] However, the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the order overruling the plea is reviewable upon appeal from the judgment of conviction. [Citation omitted.] Tlrus, the rule permits the defendant to orderly raise the question of lack of preliminary examination prior to going to trial, and also preserves the question for appellate review.” (p. 672.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Solem

3. ““A motion to quash or dismiss an information does not raise an issue of the lack or the sufficiency of a preliminary examination since such a motion reaches only some defect apparent on the face of the information.” (Syl. f 2.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Cippola