State v. Carsten’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 2025
15 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 Gregg v. United States · Scott v. United States · United States v. George H. Lustig, United States of America v. Gregory D. Pederson · United States v. Hendrix · Hess v. United States
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"`Prior convictions may cause a heavier sentence, though the defendant has already "paid" for them. A general course of dissolute, irresponsible, shiftless, or dangerous behavior may be deemed to call for longer incarceration though none of its components are, strictly, "crimes."'"”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Degen · State v. Murphy““[T]o be a proper person for probation or some sort of suspended sentence, it’s necessary that I’m convinced that he’s being truthful and candid with me ...” * sj: * * * sis “The reason I’ve sentenced you to the Penitentiary instead of putting you on probation or some type of suspended imposition is that your employment history is not real good, ... and secondly, I don’t believe you’ve been honest with the Court in relation to what occurred on that particular occasion.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Murphy““may rest on hearsay and contain information bearing no relation whatever to the crime with which the defendant is charged.” Gregg v. United States, 394 U.S. 489, 492 , 89 S.Ct. 1134, 1136 , 22 L.Ed.2d 442, 446 . See also Davis v. United States, 5 Cir., 376 F.2d 535 ; Farrow v. United States, S.D.Cal., 373 F.Supp. 113 ; State v. Bevins, 198 Neb. 761 , 255 N.W.2d 284 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Grosh
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.