Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2011 UT App 356 - State v. Lee

2011 UT App 356 - State v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · State v. Litherland · State v. Tennyson · State v. Ott · State v. Arguelles

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

  1. “inability to consult with ... counsel and to participate in the proceedings ... with a reasonable degree of rational understanding.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a rational and factual understanding of the proceedings ... or of the punishment specified for the offense charged,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “behavior was anything out of the ordinary”
    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.