Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 242 NW2D 320 - State v. Smith

State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
4
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably State v. D'Ambrosio (1993), Polly v. State (1984)

46 state decisions

11019761980199020002010decided

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 State v. Lass · 388 F. Supp. 155 - Pennsylvania v. Local Union 542, International Union of Operating Engineers · State v. Hall · State v. Orosos · 377 F. Supp. 1312 - United States v. Mitchell

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

  1. “A judge should disqualify himself in a proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where: (a) he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The right to a change of judge is not an absolute one. The judge is entitled to consult his [her] own mind, and he [she], perhaps better than anyone else, knows whether or not he [she], can give a defendant on trial before him [her] a fair and impartial trial in every way.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Briefly stated, Canon 3 C(l)(a), is basically a broad standard by which a judge should sua sponte determine the matter of self-recusation. Stated otherwise it, followed by specifics (interest and relationship), stands as a guiding precept upon which every judge, by an objective in- depth search of his or her own conscience, must decide whether a fair trial dictates he or she should make way for another judge to preside in a given justiciable controversy be it civil, criminal or otherwise.”
    3 later decisions 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.