Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 261 N.W.2d 880 - State v. Olmstead

State v. Olmstead’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
3
states following
May 2014
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently May 2014

16 state decisions

9019781980199020002010decided

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 Michigan v. Tucker · Peters v. Kiff · Johnson v. Mississippi · People v. Barbara · State v. Iverson

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

  1. ““Olmstead, himself, never indicated that his counsel was not following his instructions in entering that stipulation and, while testifying at the hearing on his motion for new trial, confirmed that ‘the whole basis of me getting a new trial was a lie detector test.’ Additionally, Olm-stead, himself, introduced the results of a previous, separate polygraph examination (which also indicated deception when he denied committing the rape). We assume that the stipulation is not disputed and should be enforced by the court when no good cause is shown to the contrary. The fact that the results were unfavorable rather than favorable is not a good cause. ‘The stipulation is in the nature of a contract and a party may not be relieved therefrom without first making application to the court and upon a showing of good cause.’ Bjerken v. Ames Sand and Gravel Company, 206 N.W.2d 884, 888 (N.D.1973).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““A motion for new trial is also addressed to the trial court’s judicial discretion and its decision will not be set aside unless an abuse of discretion is shown.””
    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.