Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 591 SO2D 1166 - State v. Potter

State v. Potter’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 2019

21 state decisions

90199120002010decided

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 Batson v. Kentucky · Swain v. State of Alabama · Mullaney v. Wilbur · Griffith v. Kentucky · Powers v. Ohio

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.

  1. “is specifically designed to promote judicial efficiency by preventing a defendant from gambling for a favorable verdict, and then, upon conviction, resorting to appeal on errors which either could have been avoided or corrected at the time or should have put an immediate halt to the proceedings.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a]n irregularity or error cannot be availed of after verdict unless it was objected to at the time of occurrence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “before it infect[s] the entire proceeding.”
    2 later decisions 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.