Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2007 UT 49 - State v. Tiedemann

State v. Tiedemann’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
4
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

57 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably State v. Maestas (2012), State v. Houston (2015)

57 state decisions

360200720102020decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Colorado v. Connelly · Arizona v. Youngblood · Michigan v. Mosley · Davis v. United States

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

  1. “In an appeal from a trial court's denial of a motion to suppress evidence, 'we review the trial court's factual findings for clear error[,] and we review its conclusions of law for correctness'”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “'that there is a formula of some kind for adequate framing and briefing of state constitutional issues before district courts and [appellate] court[s].' " State v. Hoffman, 2013 UT App 290 , ¶52 & n. 7, 318 P.3d 225 (quoting State v. Tiedemann, 2007 UT 49, ¶37 , 162 P.3d 1106 ). However, "independent analysis must begin with the constitutional text and rely on whatever assistance legitimate sources may provide in the interpretive process.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “the State's destruction of potentially exculpatory evidence violates due process,”
    3 later decisions 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.