State v. King’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably State v. Winfield (2006), Pratt v. Nelson (2007)
46 state decisions
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 United States v. Burke · State v. Litherland · State v. Hamilton · State v. Verde · State v. Winfield
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We have consistently held that a defendant who fails to preserve an objection at trial will not be able to raise that objection on appeal unless he is able to demonstrate either plain error or exceptional circumstances.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“To prevail under plain error review, a defendant must demonstrate ... that an error did in fact occur.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“'so strong or unequivocal as to inevitably taint the trial process.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. King · State v. Winfield
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.