2006 UT App 3 - State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently October 2024
11 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 Labrum v. Utah State Board of Pardons · State v. Jaeger · State v. Brown · State v. Patience · State v. Weeks
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Utah courts require specific objections in order to bring all claimed errors to the trial court's attention to give the court an opportunity to correct the errors if appropriate.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Where there is no clear or specific objection and the specific ground for objection is not clear from the context[,] the theory cannot be raised on appeal.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“One who fails to make a necessary objection or who fails to ensure that it is on the record is deemed to have waived the issue.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.