State v. Moran’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently December 2011
16 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 Wheat v. United States · United States v. Mendoza-Salgado · United States v. Burton · Gandy v. Alabama · United States v. Laura
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Some of the factors to be weighed in the balance include the promptness of the continuance motion and the length of time requested; the age and intricacy of the case; the inconvenience to the parties, witnesses, jurors, counsel, and the court; whether the request appears to be legitimate or merely contrived foot dragging; whether the defendant contributed to the circumstances giving rise to the request; whether the defendant in fact has other competent and prepared trial counsel ready to pinch-hit; whether there are multiple codefen-dants, making calendar control more difficult than usual; and any other relevant factor made manifest by the record.” Id. (quoting State v. Moran, 699 A.2d 20, 26 (R.I.1997)).”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Snell · State v. Navarro
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.