26 Ariz. App. 379 - State v. Jonas’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 2004
10 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 Russell v. United States · Hartman v. United States · United States v. Curtis · United States v. Radowitz · 9 Ariz. App. 162 - State v. Butler
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) The preliminary hearing or grand jury indictment limits the trial to the specific charge or charges stated in the magistrate's order or grand jury indictment. The charge may be amended only to correct mistakes of fact or remedy formal or technical defects, unless the defendant consents to the amendment. The charging document shall be deemed amended to conform to the evidence adduced at any court proceeding. " [Emphasis added.] Here, the state did not formally move to amend the indictment. We therefore must consider whether an amendment "deemed ... to conform to the evidence”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Phelps
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.