340 N.J. Super. 1 - State v. Yanovsky’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
April 2003
most recently cited
4 district · 6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Teague v. Lane · State v. Johnson · State v. Locurto · State v. Novembrino · State v. Hunt
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In determining retroactive application of a new rule, four judicial options are available: (1) make the new rule of law purely prospective, applying it only to cases whose operative facts arise after the new rule is announced; (2) apply the new rule to future cases and to the parties in the case announcing the new rule, while applying the old rule to all other pending and past litigation; (3) grant the new rule limited retroactivity, applying it to cases in (1) and (2) as well as to pending cases where the parties have not yet exhausted all avenues of direct review [pipeline retroactivity]; and, finally, (4) give the new rule complete retroactive effect, applying it to all cases, even those where final judgments have been entered and all avenues of direct review exhausted. [ State v. Yanovsky, 340 N.J.Super. 1, 8 , 773 A. 2d 711 (App.Div.2001), quoting State v. Burstein, 85 N.J. 394, 402-03 , 427 A. 2d 525 (1981).]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“The determination of retroactive application is generally guided by three factors: `(1) the purpose of the rule and whether it would be furthered by a retroactive application, (2) the degree of reliance placed on the old rule by those who administered it, and (3) the effect a retroactive application would have on the administration of justice.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“to all pending cases, including those on direct appeal at the time Carty was decided, but not to those cases in which defendants had exhausted all avenues of direct relief at the time Carty was decided”
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.