Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 302 NJSUPER 408 - State v. Dreher

State v. Dreher’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
7
states following
July 2017
most recently cited

35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently July 2017 · most notably State v. Brown (2001), 148 Md. App. 601 - Wilson v. State (2002)

35 state decisions

220199720002010decided

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 Griffin v. California · Smith v. Phillips · Sullivan v. Louisiana · California v. Trombetta · Arizona v. Youngblood

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

  1. “(1) the bad faith or connivance by the government; (2) whether the evidence was sufficiently material to the defense; and (3) whether the defendant was prejudiced.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “We find that during the early stages of a prosecution, it is inappropriate to bind the prosecution with any and all statements made by its agents in the course of their employment. The statements, however, take on a different status when the government, by submitting the statements to a judicial officer for the issuance of a search warrant, manifests its belief in the truth of such statements. If the statements are reliable and accurate enough for one stage of the prosecution, the State should not be allowed to hide behind their arguable inaccuracy and unreliability at another stage of the prosecution. We note that, unlike Ramirez, supra, defendant offered the evidence while Allman was on the stand testifying. Thus, any inaccuracy in the statement could have been demonstrated to the jury and, as defense counsel below suggested, the weight to be given the statement could have been decided by the jury. [Id.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “In the absence of bad faith, relief should be granted only where there is a `showing of manifest prejudice or harm' arising from the failure to preserve evidence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.