State v. Christian’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
101 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 101 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably State v. Roque (2006), City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. (2005)
101 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 Hayes v. Continental Insurance · Zamora v. Reinstein · State v. Korzep · State v. Hannah · Calik v. Kongable
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 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he best and most reliable index of a statute's meaning is the plain text of the statute.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“This statute and its companion, A.R.S. § 13-702.02, supplanted the practice of alleging “Hannah ” priors.... For instance, previously, under [State v.] Hannah, [ 126 Ariz. 575 , 617 P.2d 527 (1980),] when a defendant was convicted of three felony counts that were tried together, the state could allege two of the convictions as priors for the other conviction, thus subject ing a defendant who came to court without a prior conviction to a lengthy prison term. The sentencing provisions promulgated in A.R.S. section 13-702.02 and -3419 are much less severe.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Thomas · State v. Francis“differentiate^] the treatment of repeat offenders based on four factors: whether the prior convictions were serious in nature, whether the prior crimes for less serious offenses were committed relatively recently with respect to the present offense, whether the prior conviction was a third [or more] felony conviction, or whether the crimes committed on different occasions were consolidated for trial. 4”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Thomas · State v. Thomas
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.