State v. Babbitt’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently May 2015
13 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 Costarelli v. Massachusetts · United States v. Chambers · Bear Lake & River Water Works & Irrigation Co. v. Garland · United States v. Anderson · 26 Cal. 2d 297 - Sekt v. Justice's Court
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[I]t is quite obvious that the common-law crime of rape was embodied in the new statute. A parallel reading of the two statutes clearly indicates that every element needed to prove a violation under the old statute for rape is also needed to prove first-degree sexual assault under the new statute.” 457 A.2d at 1054 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bryant · State v. Jacques““[W]here both the prior and subsequent acts legislate upon the same subject and the subsequent act re-enacts substantial portions of the original act but either adds, eliminates or modifies provisions of the original act, the subsequent act shall be treated as amendatory only in spite of language expressly repealing the prior act. Bear Lake & River Waterworks & Irrigation Co. v. Garland, 164 U.S. 1 , 17 S.Ct. 7 , 41 L.Ed. 327 (1896).””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"Discovery and inspection. — (a) Discovery by Defendant. Upon written request by a defendant, the attorney for the State shall permit the defendant to inspect or listen to and copy or photograph any of the following items within the possession, custody, or control of the State, the existence of which is known, or by the exercise of due diligence may become known to the attorney for the State * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lanigan
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.