State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently June 2015
3 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 State v. Oster · Honomichl v. State · Petition of Brockmueller · In re T.J.E. · Petition of Nilles
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Generally, this extraordinary writ is only available to attack convictions involving collateral legal disadvantages which survive the satisfaction of a sentence. [[Image here]] The state further argues that coram nobis is inapplicable in this case as the writ is available to redress only errors of fact and not of law. We hold, however, that coram nobis encompasses legal errors of constitutional significance such as jurisdictional defects .... The error presented in this case is of the fundamental nature contemplated by co-ram nobis. To allow a felony conviction to stand when it is based upon void convictions would be an injustice of the first magnitude.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gregory v. Class
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.