Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 521 P.2d 499 - McCracken v. State

McCracken v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
3
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Risher v. State (1974), Gentry v. Warden (1975)

32 state decisions

180197419801990200020102020decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act)

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Wong Sun v. United States · United States v. Wade · Stovall v. Denno · Gilbert v. California

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. “Appellant correctly points out that the granting of the five-day period is to allow a party or his attorney an opportunity to investigate the judge to whom the case is assigned and if necessary file the requisite affidavit for disqualification, thus avoiding the waste of judicial time which would result if an affidavit or disqualification were not filed until the date of trial because this would mean that the case would have to be continued until another judge could be assigned and the disqualified judge would not be ready at that time to start the trial of another action. [footnote omitted]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[Wjhether counsel exhibited the normal and customary degree of skill possessed by attorneys who are fairly skilled in the criminal law and who have a fair amount of experience at the criminal bar.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “conclusive independent evidence, apart from the- [unreliable] identification testimony,”
    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.