Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 650 SW2D 131 - Zappas v. State

Zappas v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
January 1986
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Wooten v. State · Killebrew v. State · Chavarria v. State · United States v. Hill · United States v. Lopez

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

  1. “Even though we must reverse this conviction, the collateral result — not addressing the issues within the overruled motion to suppress — is not in the best interests of judicial economy. A review of this overruled pre-trial motion to suppress would effectively eliminate the unnecessary relitigation of the case. Therefore, in compliance with a request by both appellant and appellee that the Court of Appeals address the issues raised by appellant’s pre-trial Motion to Suppress — and in the interest that justice may best be served — this court will review the appellant’s Pre-Trial Motion to Suppress.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “A conditional plea of nolo contendere or guilty made by agreement of defendant, prosecutor and trial court places a yoke on the neck of justice and creates a situation that forces the Court of Appeals to reverse and remand cases to the trial court for a re-plea and/or trial.”
    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.