Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2011 UT App 39 - State v. Tanner

2011 UT App 39 - State v. Tanner’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
December 2016
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Gardner v. BD. OF CTY. COM. OF WASATCH CTY. · Anderson v. Taylor · Smith v. Iversen · State v. VAANA · 2001 UT App 75 - State v. Spry

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

  1. “[TJrial courts have broad discretion in matters of discovery.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “if a review of the record persuades the [appellate] court that without the error there was a reasonable likelihood of a more favorable result for the defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “In light of this overwhelming evidence of Defendant's guilt, we conclude that any error in denying Defendant's motion to compel was harmless.”
    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.