Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 544 NE2D 153 - Seeley v. State

Seeley v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
October 2003
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Cherek v. United States · Boyd v. North Carolina · Lindsey v. State · Gee v. State · Averhart v. State

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

  1. “At all. stages, the trial court must have discretion to make the determination, within the context of the particular circumstances; and a denial of a motion to interrogate the jury will be reversible error, only if we can say that there has been substantial, peril. If the jury has been interrogated and admonished, as set forth above, the continuance of the trial, over the imperiled party’s motion for a mistrial, will be reversible error only if it can be said, after giving the decision of the trial judge the benefit of all reasonable doubt, that the peril was such as to be uncurable by instruction.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “evidence of \prejudice which would requlre the cause ¥o\be removed from the jury.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “after the jury has been selected and the trial is in progress.”
    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.