Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2002 MT 286 - State v. Tweed

State v. Tweed’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
3
states following
February 2015
most recently cited

24 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Roe, Warden v. Flores-Ortega · Rodriquez v. United States · Hans v. State · State v. Bowley

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

  1. “[S]uch a motion is an original proceeding before this Court and the provisions of Rule 17, M.R.App.P., apply. In order to obtain an out-of-time appeal, the pro se defendant or defendant’s counsel shall file a motion with this Court. ... Upon a showing that the failure to notice a criminal appeal in a timely manner was “excusable under the circumstances,” pursuant to Rule 21(b), M.R.App.P., this Court may conclude that an out-of-time appeal is the appropriate remedy. In such an event, we will order the matter remanded to the district court with an instruction to vacate and re-enter judgment to afford the defendant a second opportunity to act within the statutory time frames for filing notice of appeal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a]n out-of-time appeal is a remedy that may be available to a criminal defendant who, through no fault of his own, misses a deadline for filing an appeal,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.