Schmidt v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently October 2013
13 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 Kercheval v. United States · Davis v. Alaska · Roberts v. United States · Town of Mashpee v. Mashpee Tribe · Ristaino v. Ross
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Denial by the district court is within its sound discretion and there must be a plausible reason for withdrawal.” Ecker v. State, Wyo., 545 P.2d 641, 642 (1976).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Wright v. State · Kaldwell v. State“The trial court twice had ordered that Schmidt be examined on the issue of mental illness or deficiency. It had before it a third report from the Wyoming State Hospital, a fourth report from Dr. Yost, and a report made some years earlier in Towa. The case had been filed in the district court for almost a year. Similar proceedings had been conducted in a neighboring county. The State of Wyoming had prepared its case for trial on two occasions, and on one of those the jury panel actually had reported for duty. Because abuse of discretion is the standard we do not require that the State establish prejudice, but on the state of this record we could not as a matter of law negate a conclusion by the district court that prejudice had been shown. *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the most important mitigating factor in granting a plea-withdrawal motion is that the defendant believed or had reason to believe that a meritorious defense was available to him.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Nixon 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.