Robertson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
73 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Commonwealth v. Rodriquez (1992), Jones v. State (1999)
73 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 Terry v. Ohio · Chapman v. State of California · Rakas v. Illinois · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · United States v. Mendenhall
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Pursuant to the plain error standard, the error complained of must be so clearly prejudicial to substantial rights as to jeopardize the fairness and integrity of the trial process_ Furthermore, the doctrine of plain error is limited to material defects which are apparent on the face of the record; which are basic, serious and fundamental in their character, and which clearly deprive an accused of a substantial right, or which clearly show manifest injustice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Grace v. State · Mason v. State“'[TJhere must be a narrowly drawn authority to permit a reasonable search for weapons for the protection of the police officer, where ... a reasonably prudent man in the circumstances would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of others was in danger.’ ”) (quoting Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 27 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)); 11 Del. C. § 1903 (authorizing officer to search for”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Caldwell v. State · State v. Morrow“A person who knowingly has direct physical control over a thing at a given time is regarded as being in actual possession of it.”). 86 . Thomas, 2005 WL 3031636 , at (emphasis in original). Black's Law Dictionary 1183 (7th ed. 1999) defines constructive possession as: Control or dominion over a property without actual possession or custody of it. 87 . At trial, the State asserted that it”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Lecates v. State · Lecates 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.