Pore v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 2016
4 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 Anders v. California · Sanders v. United States · United Biscuit Co. of America v. Federal Trade Commission · New York Central R. Co. v. United States · Thompson 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An appeal by a defendant may be taken within ten (10) days after entry of the judgment appealed from, but if a motion for a new trial or an arrest of judgment has been made within the ten (10) day period, an appeal from a judgment of conviction may be taken within ten (10) days after entry of the order denying the motion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCracken v. State“Our holding today does not preclude appellant from making a second application for post conviction relief.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Merrill v. State
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.