State v. Compton’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently November 2014 · most notably State v. Favela (1996), Forman v. Motor Vehicle Administration (1993)
34 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 Schmerber v. State of California · Nixon v. Administrator of General Services · South Dakota v. Neville · Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Lyman Lamb Co. · Edward Dreyer v. People of the State of Illinois
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) the essential nature of the power being exercised; (b) the degree of control by one [branch] over another; (c) the objective sought to be attained by the [branch exercising control]; and (d) the practical result of the blending of powers as shown by actual experience over a period of time. [Citation omitted.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘The basic meaning of the separation of powers doctrine is that the whole power of one department should not be exercised by the same hands which possess the whole power of either of the other departments. [Citations omitted.] It does not necessarily follow, however, that an entire and complete separation is either desirable or was ever intended by the framers of the Constitution. The fact that the powers of one department may overlap with another department’s powers has long been a recognized fact. Throughout the judicial history of this state early decisions attempted to apply the doctrine strictly, refusing to tolerate any overlapping of powers. [Citation omitted.] The more recent cases have modified the doctrine, taking a more pragmatic, flexible and practical approach giving recognition to the fact diere may be a certain degree of blending or admixture of the three powers of government and that absolute separation of powers is impossible.’ ” 233 Kan. at 696 -97 (quoting State v. Greenlee, 228 Kan. 712, 715-16 , 620 P.2d 1132 [1980]).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Favela
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.