Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
86 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably Allridge v. State (1991), Gardner v. State (1987)
86 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 Davis v. United States · Smith v. State · McManus v. State · United States v. Hinckley · De La Rosa 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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A question is proper if it seeks to discover a juror's views on an issue applicable to the case.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Quezada v. State · Gardner v. State“Voir dire examination can become the lengthiest part of the proceeding. To curb some prolixity, it is recognized that courts need have a discretionary area within which the examination might be reasonably limited. Otherwise, a trial court is forced to allow a defendant to ask an endless number of questions, so long as the questions show some relevance to the issues raised at the trial. Therefore, a trial judge can exercise his discretion to prevent an improperly phrased question from being asked when it threatens to duplicate earlier questions, or presents so broad a question as to constitute a global fishing expedition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Strong v. State“... although time constraints on voir dire are a legitimate concern of a trial judge, the paramount concern in a case such as this must be the appellant’s freedom to intelligently exercise his peremptory challenges. We cannot improve upon our Presiding Judge’s observation: It is always commendable for a trial court to dispatch business with promptness and expedition, but this salutary result must never be attained at the risk of denying to a party on trial a substantial right.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCarter 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.