Daniel v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “in light of the interests that the right to a speedy disposition of an appeal is intended to protect.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bhutto v. State · Janssen v. State

2. “Generally, an error that violates a constitutional right of the accused is presumed to be prejudicial, unless the reviewing court is able to declare its belief that the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.... On direct appeal, the State has the burden of proving that the constitutional errors below were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Gentry v. State, 806 P.2d 1269, 1272 (Wyo.1991). Because the State was without benefit of our Asch [v. State, 2008 WY 18 , 62 P.3d 945 (2003)] opinion, its argument was limited to Daniel's failure to show prejudice; however, Harlow held that we have discretion to overlook the government's failure to argue harmlessness in an appropriate case. Harlow, TY 44-46. In deciding whether to exercise that discretion, a reviewing court may consider such factors as the length and complexity of the record, whether the harmlessness of the error is certain or debatable, and whether a reversal would result in protracted, costly, and futile proceedings in the trial court. Id.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Vigil v. State

3. “Incarceration is not 'oppressive' and thus does not support a claim of prejudice under Barker, if the absence of a meritorious appeal establishes that the defendant is rightfully incarcerated.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Janssen v. State