State v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 2012
7 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 Bouie v. City of Columbia · State v. Salmon
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[al 'defendant is not entitled, as a constitutional right, ... to information regarding the future use of his conviction for purposes of enhancement' ") (quoting Presley v. State, 498 S$o.2d 832, 833 (Miss.1986)); State v. Edwards, 302 S.C. 492 , 397 S.E.2d 88, 89-90 (1990) (rejecting defendant's due process argument and stating: "The inquiry is not whether appellant had notice of the 1988 amendment at the time of his 1983 conviction, but whether he had fair notice of the amendment when he committed the current offense on February 3, 1989. Because the current offense took place after the effective date of the amendment, appellant clearly had notice that his 1983 conviction would be considered in determining his punishment for the current offense. Therefore, appellant's due process rights have not been violated.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“that the legislature did not intend for the 1988 amendment to apply 'retroactively' to allow consideration of his 1983 conviction [in determining the degree of his current DUI offense]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the clear and unambiguous language of the amendment indicates that the new 10 year period is to be used in determining the degree of any DUI committed on or after January 1, 1989”
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.