State v. Tarnawiecki’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 state decisions

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

1. “(e) The court ... may not accept [a guilty] plea until the court has found: [[Image here]] (4) (A) the defendant understands the nature and elements of the offense to which the plea is entered, that upon trial the prosecution would have the burden of proving each of those elements beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the plea is an admission of all those elements; (B) there is a factual basis for the plea. A factual basis is sufficient if it establishes that the charged crime was actually committed by the defendant or, if the defendant refuses or is otherwise unable to admit culpability, that the prosecution has sufficient evidence to establish a substantial risk of conviction.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Mora · State v. Melo

2. “`right to a speedy public trial before an impartial jury.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2002 UT App 134 - State v. Hittle · 2002 UT App 323 - State v. Dean

3. “was error. Id. at ¶ 19. Therefore, like Tarnawiecki, the trial court's failure to inform Defendant of his right to a speedy trial was an obvious error. ¶ 8 The State argues that the alleged error was not obvious because Tarnawieck is distinguishable from Defendant's case. In Tarnawiecki, the trial court”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2002 UT App 134 - State v. Hittle