State v. Dilger’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently March 2015
2 federal appellate · 20 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3731
Relies on PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins · United States Steel Corporation v. United States Environmental Protection Agency · United States v. Booth · United States v. Hawk · State v. Webber
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““29-28-07. From what the state may appeal. An appeal may be taken by the state from: * * * * * * “5. An order ... suppressing evidence ... when accompanied by a statement of the prosecuting attorney asserting that the deprivation of the use of the property ... suppressed ... has rendered the proof available to the state with respect to the criminal charge filed with the court, (1) insufficient as a matter of law, or (2) so weak in its entirety that any possibility of prosecuting such charge to a conviction has been effectively destroyed....””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Berger · State v. Dilger““... [0]ur review of the prosecutor’s statement and explanation must be guided by the utmost deference for the prosecutor’s judgment in evaluating the remaining proof. The prosecuting attorney is in a better position than either his opponent or this Court to evaluate the State’s chances of succeeding at trial with the available evidence. Our chief concern is that the prosecutor discharge his statutory obligation of determining whether or not the suppressed evidence is critical to the State’s case. We are reluctant to dismiss the State’s appeal unless the prosecution’s determination of the need for the suppressed evidence is clearly inconsistent with the record or is without foundation in reason or logic.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Allery““... our decision to allow the appeal should not be read as shifting to a defendant the burden of proving that the State could still reasonably prosecute without the suppressed evidence. Nor does it mean that in the future this court will not consider dismissing appeals for failure to file the prosecutor’s statement with the notice of appeal.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Perbix
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.