State v. Clouatre’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently April 2006
21 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 7 Ill. App. 3d 1029 - People v. Kucala · 7 Ill. App. 3d 713 - People v. MacKlin
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“and that a considerably longer period could elapse before trial without resultant unfairness or injustice to the accused. The outer limits of Alaska's constitutional right to speedy trial are not defined by Rule 45. In short, we are of the view that our decisions pertaining to waiver of fundamental constitutional rights are inapplicable in the factual context of the instant case to the Criminal Rule 45(d)(1) excluded period issue raised herein. Finally, the other courts which permit a”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Cooksey v. State · Andrew v. State“(d) Excluded Periods. The following periods shall be excluded in computing the time for trial: (1) The period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the defendant, including but not limited to motions to dismiss or suppress, examinations and hearings on competency, the period during which the defendant is incompetent to stand trial, interlocutory appeals, and trial of other charges. (No pre-trial motions shall be held under advisement for more than 30 days and any time longer than 30 days shall not be considered as an excluded period.)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Dunbar v. State · Snyder v. State“(a) Priorities in Scheduling Criminal Cases. The court shall provide for placing criminal proceedings upon appropriate calendars. Preference shall be given to criminal proceedings and the trial of defendants in custody shall be given preference over other criminal cases. (b) Speedy Trial Time Limits. A defendant charged with either a felony or a misdemeanor shall be tried within four months from the time set forth in section (c). (c) When Time Commences to Run. The time for trial shall begin running, without demand by the defendant, as follows: (1) From the date the defendant is arrested, initially arraigned, or from the date the charge (complaint, indictment, or information) is served upon the defendant, whichever is first. The arrest, arraignment, or service upon the defendant of a complaint, indictment, or information, relating to subsequent charges arising out of the same conduct, or the refiling of the original charge, shall not extend the time, unless the evidence on which the new charge is based was not available to the prosecution at the time the defendant was either initially arrested, arraigned, or served with the original charge, and a showing of due diligence in securing defendant for the original charges is made by the prosecution ; or (2) If the defendant is to be tried again following a mistrial, an order for a new trial, or an appeal or collateral attack, from the date of mistrial, order granting a new trial, or remand.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Dunbar v. State · Nickels v. State
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.