Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 657 SW2D 289 - McCartney v. State

McCartney v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
2
states following
January 2007
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 2007

5 state decisions

20198319902000decided

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 McMahon v. State · Schellert v. State · State v. Tyler

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

  1. “The trial court, having ordered a pre-sentence investigation and not having a plea bargain for probation before him, was under an obligation to tell the mov-ant the options available to the court after such a pre-sentence investigation. All of these options were more favorable to the defendant than seven years immediate confinement would have been if probation was not granted. Movant and his counsel undoubtedly thought so, for they raised no objection to the court’s statement of the alternatives. The trial court did not alter the basic plea agreement nor reject it; the court simply explicated the consequences of the bargain.”
    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.