Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2002 UT App 126 - State v. Martinez

2002 UT App 126 - State v. Martinez’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Holgate · State v. Menzies · State v. Ramirez · State v. Long · West Valley City v. Majestic Investment Co.

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

  1. “A trial court's denial of a motion for mistrial [based on a discovery violation] will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion. This is because the trial court is in the best position to determine whether the incident prejudiced the jury. Therefore, we will not find an abuse of discretion unless a review of the record shows that the court's decision is plainly wrong in that the incident so likely influenced the jury that the defendant cannot be said to have a fair trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “'We review rulings on motions for a mistrial based on prosecutorial misconduct [Le., discovery violations] for abuse of discretion.”
    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.