Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 492 P2D 109 - Tarnef v. State

Tarnef v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
2
states following
February 2024
most recently cited

33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably McClain v. State (1974), Anthony v. State (1974)

33 state decisions

230197119801990200020102020decided

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 Klopfer v. State of North Carolina · United States v. Ewell · Dickey v. Florida · Beavers v. Haubert · State v. Chaney

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

  1. “To express this rule in another way, the circumstantial evidence must be such as to exclude every reasonable theory consistent with the defendant’s innocence as to the particular crime charged. Also, if the evidence is suspectible of two reasonable interpretations, one of which points to the defendant’s guilt and the other to his innocence, it is your duty to adopt that interpretation which points to the defendant’s innocence, and reject the other which points to his guilt.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “We do not mean to suggest by this holding that a converse presumption will be employed for less substantial delays— i. e., that prejudice will be presumed not to exist. Rather, the extent to which a showing of prejudice will be required in such cases will depend on the facts of each case. Generally, the longer the period of delay, the more willing the court should be to find a denial of the right to speedy trial without a showing of actual prejudice to the accused.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “It is unlawful for any person to manufacture, possess, have under his control, sell, prescribe, administer, dispense, give, barter, supply or distribute in any manner, or compound any narcotic drug except as authorized in this chapter.”
    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.