Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 7 P.3d 5 - Trusky v. State

Trusky v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
December 2020
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently December 2020

16 state decisions

100200020102020decided

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 Glasser v. United States · West Virginia State Department of Tax & Revenue v. Internal Revenue Service · State of Arizona v. State of California · Vaughn v. State · Martin v. State

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.

  1. “An error warrants reversal only when it is prejudicial and it affects an appellant's substantial rights. The party who is appealing bears the burden to establish that an error was prejudicial.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “We do not need to address whether the notes fall under the rubric of W.R.Cr.P. 16(b)(1)(B) and W.R.COr.P. 26.2(a) because the record does not include a copy of the report or the notes. Without copies of the report or the notes in question, we are unable to determine whether the trial court abused its discretion in Wendy's case. The appellant has the burden to prove abuse of discretion and the burden to provide an adequate record on appeal. Clark v. Alexander, 953 P.2d 145, 150 (Wyo.1998); Stadtfeld v. Stadtfeld, 920 P.2d 662, 664 (Wyo.1996). Given Wendy's failure to provide us with a copy of the social worker's notes or the report, we have no choice but to affirm the trial court's decision to allow discovery of the notes pursuant to the relevant rules of criminal procedure.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “(a) Order for Production. Upon order of the court, the attorney for the state or the defendant and the defendant's attorney shall produce for the examination and use of the other party, any written or recorded statement of a witness other than the defendant in their possession or which they may reasonably obtain and which relates to the subject matter about which the witness has testified or will testify and: (1) Upon demand of the other party, the court shall order the statement to be produced after a witness has testified; and (2) Upon motion of a party or upon its own motion, the court may require the statement to be produced at any time before 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.