State v. Buchanan’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently March 2015 · most notably State v. Maestas (1978), State v. Leyba (1969)
4 federal appellate · 40 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 Griffin v. California · Opper v. United States · State v. Paris · Winner v. Sharp · State v. Dena
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * The controverted instruction was actually for the benefit of the defendant as a caution to the jury that it should not indulge in any presumption against him because of his failure to testify. There having been no adverse comment by the prosecutor or the trial judge upon the failure to testify, the rule announced in Griffin v. State of California, 1965, 380 U.S. 609 , 85 S.Ct. 1229 , 14 L.Ed.2d 106 , is not applicable.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Sandoval
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.