Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2003 MT 239 - State v. Finley

State v. Finley’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
1
states following
June 2024
most recently cited

48 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably State v. West (2008), State v. Triplett (2008)

48 state decisions

200200320102020decided

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 Johnson v. Zerbst · Morrissey v. Brewer · Gagnon v. Scarpelli · In Re the Mental Health of K.G.F. · Park v. Montana Sixth Judicial District Court

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

  1. “(1) At any time during probation, if a probation and parole officer reasonably believes that the probationer has violated a condition of probation, a court may issue a warrant for the arrest of the probationer... (2) Any probation and parole officer may arrest the probationer without a warrant or may orally deputize any other officer with power of arrest to do so by giving the officer oral authorization and within 12 hours delivering to the detention center a written statement setting forth that the probationer has, in the judgment of the probation and parole officer, violated the conditions of probation.... (3) A probation and parole officer may authorize a detention center to hold a probationer arrested under this section without bail for 72 hours.... (4) If the probationer is detained and bond is set, the probation and parole officer shall file a report of violation within 10 days of the arrest of the probationer.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(4) Without unnecessary delay, the offender must be brought before the judge, and the offender must be advised of: (a) the allegations of the petition; (b) the opportunity to appear and to present evidence in the offender’s own behalf; (c) the opportunity to question adverse witnesses; and (d) the right to be represented by counsel at the revocation hearing. . . (5) A hearing is required before a suspended or deferred sentence can be revoked or the terms or conditions of the sentence can be modified . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(1) written notice of the claimed probation violation; (2) disclosure of the evidence against the defendant; (3) the opportunity to be heard in person and present testimonial and documentary evidence; (4) the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses; (5) a neutral arbiter; and (6) a written statement of the evidence relied upon by the arbiter and the reason for revoking probation.”
    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.