Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 293 Minn. 493 - State v. Prettyman

State v. Prettyman’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
2
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably State v. Caron (1974), State v. Ture (1984)

47 state decisions

20019721980199020002010decided

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. Waldron · State v. Perry · State v. Gulbrandsen · State v. Schwartz · State v. Jones

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. ““In final argument the prosecuting attorney frequently began a sentence with the words, T think’; e.g., T think you’ll find that * * *’ or T think you will be able to find that * * *,’ followed by reference to evidence on an issue or a permissible inference that could be made. The frequency and context of the use of these words suggests to us that they were perhaps more idle cliche than deliberate expression of personal opinion, and the absence of objection by the defense counsel who actually heard them adds to this impression. They are, nevertheless, impermissible. [Citations omitted.] Although always wrong, such comments are not always prejudicial. The strength of the evidence against defendant and the otherwise balanced argument addressed to the jury’s acknowledged role in judging the evidence may be considered in determining whether such comments infected the verdict. So considered, we conclude that there was no reversible error.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““* * * Although always wrong, such comments are not always prejudicial. The strength of the evidence against defendant and the otherwise balanced argument addressed to the jury’s acknowledged role in judging the evidence may be considered in determining whether such comments infected the verdict.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.