State v. Phair’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
July 2014
most recently cited
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Cronin · United States v. Rossomando · United States v. Karro · State v. Anderson · State v. Verhoef
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Trial courts have considerable discretion not only in granting or denying a mistrial!,] but also in determining the prejudicial effect of a witness’ statements. Only when this discretion is clearly abused will this court overturn the trial court’s decision. To justify the granting of a mistrial, an actual showing of prejudice must exist. Prejudicial error for purposes of determining whether error constitutes grounds for mistrial is error ‘which in all probability must have produced some effect upon the jury’s verdict and is harmful to the substantial rights of the party assigning it.’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Pasek“[Sufficient intent to inflict harm can be found from the intentional withholding of information from a lender which lowers the value of the transaction due to the lender’s lack of information pertinent to the accurate assessment of the risk it faces and the propriety of extending credit to that particular individual, and because of the increased expense and difficulty of any necessary bill collection efforts. Because this intent is sufficient, it is irrelevant whether the borrower intended in good faith to repay the loan.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Kessler“Any person who obtains property of another by deception is guilty of theft. A person deceives if, with intent to defraud, that person: (1) Creates or reinforces a false impression, including false impressions as to law, value, intention, or other state of mind. However, as to a person’s intention to perform a promise, deception may not be inferred from the fact alone that that person did not subsequently perform the promise....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Kessler
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.