Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 740 A2D 783 - State v. Mullen

State v. Mullen’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
May 2015
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Chambers · Hydro-Manufacturing, Inc. v. Kayser-Roth Corp. · State v. Souza · Isserlis v. Director of Public Works · VanMarter v. Royal Indemnity Co.

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

  1. “"No suit, prosecution, or indictment pending at the time of the repeal of any statute for any offense committed or for the recovery of any fine, forfeiture, or penalty incurred under the statute so repealed shall in any case be affected by the repeal, but the suit, prosecution, or indictment may be proceeded with, and the act shall be deemed to be in force for the purpose of prosecuting the act to final judgment and execution or sentence, as the case may be.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.