Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 22 Ariz. App. 338 - State v. Pearce

22 Ariz. App. 338 - State v. Pearce’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
4
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently March 2018

2 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

7019741980199020002010decided

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 Hadley v. State · State v. Jamison · State v. Jackson

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

  1. ““We * * * cannot agree that defense counsel are precluded from ‘drawing the sting.’ We hold that the granting of the in limine motion was error. We recognize that trial judges in Arizona have ruled both ways. * * State v. Pearce, 22 Ariz.App. 338, 341 , 527 P.2d 297, 300 (1974).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “to make punishable acts which endanger or are likely to endanger other persons,”
    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.