Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2006 MT 39 - Swan v. State

Swan v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
October 2025
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently October 2025

18 state decisions

80200620102020decided

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 Tumey v. State of Ohio · State v. Van Kirk · State v. White · Hagen v. State · State v. LaMere

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

  1. “We have held that defense counsel's decision not to move for substitution of a trial judge rnay constitute [IAC] if the defendant establishes there is a reasonable probability that the outcome ofthe trial would have been different if counsel had moved for a substitute judge.”
    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.