Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 705 N.E.2d 501 - Chissell v. State

Chissell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
December 2011
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently December 2011

14 state decisions

120199920002010decided

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 California v. Trombetta · Arizona v. Youngblood · Energy Cooperative, Inc. v. Phillips Petroleum Co. · Lindsay v. Beneficial Reinsurance Co. · Regents of the University v. Public Employment Relations Board

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

  1. “"limited to evidence that might be expected to play a significant role in the suspect's defense. To meet this standard of constitutional materiality, evidence must both possess an exculpatory value that was apparent before the evidence was destroyed, and be of such a nature that the defendant would be unable to obtain comparable evidence by other reasonably available means."”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “evidentiary material of which no more can be said than that it could have been subjected to tests, the results of which might have exonerated the defendant.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[a]fter a verdict, finding, or plea of guilty, if a new trial is not granted, the court shall enter a judgment of conviction.”
    3 later decisions 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.