Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2002 SD 42 - State v. Owens

State v. Owens’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
4
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably State v. Engesser (2003), Behrens v. Wedmore (2005)

39 state decisions

180200220102020decided

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 Katz v. United States · Smith v. Maryland · Idaho v. Wright · Cities of Charlottesville v. Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. · Raphan v. United States

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

  1. “[i]f relevant, photographs are not rendered inadmissible merely because they incidentally tend to arouse passion or prejudice.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “SDCL 23A-20-6 provides that “the court may in its discretion allow examination of one or more jurors apart from the other jurors.” There is, however, no “right” or “requirement” that prospec tive jurors be individually examined out of the presence of other jurors. Individual voir dire is only a “precautionary procedure which may be permitted, in the discretion of the trial court....””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he question is not whether the interrogators' statements were the cause of the confession[,] but whether those statements were so manipulative or coercive that they deprived [a defendant] of his ability to make an unrestrained, autonomous decision to confess.”
    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.