State v. Estencion’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
134 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 134 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably State v. Hoey (1994), 4 Haw. App. 603 - State v. Miller (1983)
134 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 Barker v. Wingo · Gooding v. United States · PepsiCo, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission · State v. Fry · Hilbert v. Dooling
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 134 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the seriousness of the offense; the facts and the circumstances of the case which led to the dismissal; and the impact of a reprosecution on the administration of this chapter and on the administration of justice.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Sasai. · State v. Hern“In criminal cases, 'the power of a court to dismiss a case on its own motion for failure to prosecute with due diligence is inherent.'”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. English · State v. Barua“(b) By Court. Except in the case of traffic offenses, the court shall, on motion of the defendant, dismiss the charge, with or without prejudice in its discretion, if trial is not commenced within 6 months from: (1)the date of arrest or of filing of the charge, whichever is sooner, on any offense based on the same conduct or arising from the same criminal episode for which the arrest or charge was made; ***** (c) Excluded Periods. The following periods shall be excluded in computing the time for trial commencement: (1) periods of delay resulting from collateral or other proceedings concerning the defendant, including but not limited to penal irresponsibility examinations and periods during which he is incompetent to stand trial, hearings on pretrial motions, interlocutory appeals and trials of other charges; (2) periods of delay resulting from congestion of the trial docket when the congestion is attributable to exceptional circumstances; (3) periods of delay resulting from a continuance granted at the request or with the consent of the defendant or his counsel; ***** (7) a reasonable period of delay when the defendant is joined for trial with a codefendant as to whom the time for trial has not run and there is good cause for not granting a severance; and (8) other periods of delay for good cause.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Gillis · State v. Bowman
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.