Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 688 N.E.2d 402 - State v. Hurst

State v. Hurst’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
2
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently June 2015 · most notably Goldsberry v. State (2005), Vermillion v. State (1999)

30 state decisions

220199720002010decided

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 United States v. Halper · Kansas v. Hendricks · United States v. Ursery · Department of Revenue of Mont. v. Kurth Ranch · United States v. Ward

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

  1. “[n]o person shall be held on recognizance or otherwise to answer a criminal charge for a period in aggregate embracing more than one year from the date the criminal charge against such defendant is filed, or from the date of his arrest on such charge, whichever is later; except where a continuance was had on his motion, or the delay was caused by his act, or where there was not sufficient time to try him during such period because of congestion of the court calendar!)]”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. State v. Erlewein · Havvard v. State
  2. “had a reasonable expectation that the motion would be ruled on in due course and that, if it came to trial, he would be tried within the correct time limit”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. State v. Stacy · Cook v. State
  3. “statutory scheme [is] so punitive either in purpose or effect as to negate [the State's] intention to deem it civil.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. Davis v. State · Goldsberry 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.