Diehl v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably Attorney Grievance Commission v. Alison (1989), State v. Wiegmann (1998)
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 47 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 Cantwell v. State of Connecticut · Roth v. United States · Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire · Cohen v. California · Michigan v.
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is not punishable in the absence of compelling reasons.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We conclude, therefore, that where, as here a person is acting in a lawful manner (a passenger getting out of a stopped car) and is the object of an unlawful police order, it is not usually a criminal violation for such person to verbally protest a police officer’s insistence upon submission to such an order. We hold that the State failed to make out a prima facie showing of a violation of § 121 and, therefore, the trial judge erred in not granting Diehl's motion for a judgment of acquittal at the conclusion of the State's case or at the close of all the evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Polk v. State“wilfully disturb[ing] any neighborhood in ... [any] city, town or county [of this State] by loud and unseemly noises, or ... profanely curs[ing] or swear[ing] or us[ing] obscene language upon or near to any street or highway within the hearing of persons passing by or along such highway.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Polk v. State
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.