Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 605 SW2D 128 - State v. Smothers

State v. Smothers’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably State v. Royal (1981), State v. Bucklew (1998)

43 state decisions

2801980199020002010decided

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 · State v. Curtis · State v. Moten · State v. Stapleton · State v. Couch

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

  1. ““The question remains, however, whether the failure to disclose resulted in fundamental unfairness or prejudice to defendant. State v. Moten, 542 S.W.2d 317, 320 (Mo.App.1976). When non-compliance with an applicable discovery rule is brought to the attention of the court, the trial court is given the discretion to ‘order ... disclosure ..., grant a continuance, exclude such evidence or enter such other orders as it deems just under the circumstances.’ Rule 25.45 (present Rule 25.16). The trial court is not required to apply the drastic remedy of a mistrial simply because the statement has not been produced.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““A conviction resulting from a fair trial should not be reversed for the purpose of disciplining and deterring prosecutors, particularly where the mechanism for discipline and deterrence is provided elsewhere.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(A) Except as otherwise provided in these Rules as to protective orders, and subject to constitutional limitations, on written request by the state, the defendant shall disclose to counsel for the state such part or all of the following material or information within his possession or control designated in such request: (1) Any reports or statements of experts made in connection with the particular case, including results of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests, experiments, or comparisons, which the defense intends to introduce into evidence at a hearing or trial, except that those portions of any of the above containing statements made by the defendant shall not be disclosed; (2) The names and last known addresses of persons, other than defendant, whom defendant intends to call as witnesses at any hearing or at the trial, together with their written or recorded statements, and existing memoranda reporting or summarizing part or all of their oral statements!.] [[Image here]]”
    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.