Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 473 P2D 616 - Dimmick v. State

Dimmick v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1970

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
September 2016
most recently cited

25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably 164 W. Va. 216 - State v. Vance (1980), Risher v. State (1974)

25 state decisions

11019701980199020002010decided

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. § 242 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Monroe v. Pape · Jackson v. Denno · Alderman v. United States · Rogers v. Richmond

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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The right to the effective assistance of counsel requires only that counsel be conscientious and diligent in assisting a defendant in having a genuine trial in a reasonable sense — a trial where the government is put to its burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, in accordance with established principles of law and fundamental notions of fair play and substantial justice, (footnote omitted)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A conviction shall not be had on the testimony of an accomplice unless it is corroborated by other evidence which tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime; and the corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the crime or the circumstances of the commission.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The statutory requirement of corroboration is based on an assumption that an accomplice might falsely accuse others of a erime in order to purchase for himself immunity from punishment. This assumption is dispelled and the statutory requirement satisfied when the corroborating evidence tends to induce in the minds of the jurors a rational belief that the accomplice was speaking the truth when he implicated the defendant in the criminal event [footnotes omitted].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.