Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 485 SW2D 96 - State v. Sechrest

State v. Sechrest’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
July 2009
most recently cited

25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently July 2009 · most notably State v. Sidebottom (1988), State v. Winckler (1977)

25 state decisions

1301972198019902000decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Carroll v. United States · Spinelli v. United States · Chambers v. Maroney · State v. Hutchinson

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. ““Like I said, this is a case of circumstantial evidence. There was no one who could identify John R. Sechrest as the man who entered that home. But yet there is no one who has come forward with a reasonable explanation for how the property got into defendant’s car.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““This court has held in many cases that the rule and statute do not prohibit a reference to the failure of a defendant to offer evidence but only to the failure of the accused to testify.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “that the statement under review would have been considered by the jury as a comment on his failure to testify because he was the only person who could have explained the presence of the articles in the car.”
    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.