Yorke v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
74 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably Wiggins v. State (1991), Bowers v. State (1990)
74 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 Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council · Jacobellis v. Ohio · Unimet Corp. v. United Steelworkers · Public Broadcasting Service v. Network Project · Berry v. State
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The newly discovered evidence may well have produced a different result, that is, there was a substantial or significant possibility that the verdict of the trier of fact would have been affected.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. McGhie v. State · Miller v. State“(a) Within ten days of verdict. On motion of the defendant filed within ten days after a verdict, the court, in the interest of justice, may order a new trial. (c) Newly Discovered Evidence. The court may grant a new trial or other appropriate relief on the ground of newly discovered evidence which could not have been discovered by due diligence in time to move for a new trial pursuant to section (a) of this Rule: (1) on motion filed within one year after the later of (A) the date the court imposed sentence or (B) the date the court received a mandate issued by the final appellate court to consider a direct appeal from the judgment or a belated appeal permitted as post conviction relief[.]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Miller v. State · Argyrou v. State“All in all, we are constrained to conclude that the courts generally play by ear with an ad hoc approach whether the newly discovered evidence calls for a new trial, no matter what words they use to describe the standard alleged to support the decision. It seems that they actually lean on the assertion, which has become a cliche, regarding hardcore pornography made by Justice Stewart, concurring in Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184, 197 , 84 S.Ct. 1676 , 12 L.Ed.2d 793 (1964): “I know it when I see it.””
3 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.