Woehlhoff v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently February 2016
14 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. Johnson · City of Grand Forks v. Mata · State v. Willey · Wiederholt v. Director, North Dakota Department of Transportation · State v. DeCoteau
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The appointment of counsel is discretionary, but applications should be read in a light most favorable to the applicant. If a substantial issue of law or fact may exist, counsel should be appointed.... In the instant case we are presented with the exceptional situation in which it was appropriate for the court not to appoint counsel for McMorrow. McMorrow was able to file an application without assistance. His application, read most favorably toward him, did not raise the possibility of a substantial issue of law or fact. We affirm the trial court’s order denying MeMorrow’s petition for post-conviction relief and his motion requesting appointment of counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Fulks“the trial court's summary denial of post-conviction relief was correct.”
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.