Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 279 S.C. 278 - State v. Dingle

State v. Dingle’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
August 2013
most recently cited

24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2013 · most notably Horton v. California (1990), State v. Halczyszak (1986)

24 state decisions

1101983199020002010decided

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 Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Amperex Electronic Corp. v. New York Racing Assn., Inc. · White v. Morgan · State v. Williams · State v. Linder

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

  1. “Although it is generally correct to state that the purpose of a preliminary hearing is to “apprise the defendant of the nature of the State’s evidence,” its purpose is more specifically “... to establish that probable cause exists to continue the criminal process. The State has the burden of proving probable cause, but is not required to call all of its potential witnesses.” To this end, we have previously held that hearsay testimony as to the nature of the State’s evidence is permissible.”
    2 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.