State v. Baum’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
July 2009
most recently cited
2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Benton v. Maryland · Arizona v. Washington · Illinois v. Somerville · State v. Kirby · State v. Prince
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Given the “varying and often unique situations arising during the course of a criminal trial,” the United States Supreme Court has recognized a broad discretion reserved to a trial judge in declaring a mistrial. [State v. Kirby, 269 S.C. 25 , 236 S.E.2d 33 , 35 (S.C.1977) (quoting Somerville, 410 U.S. at 462 , 93 S.Ct. 1066 ) ]. A trial judge’s decision to grant a mistrial will not be overturned absent an abuse of discretion amounting to an error of law. [State v. Rowlands, 343 S.C. 454 , 539 S.E.2d 717 , 719 (S.C.Ct.App.2000) ].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Baum v. Rushton
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.