State v. Rhodes’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably State v. Johnson (1985), State v. Anaya (1996)
44 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 Oyler v. Boles · Wade v. Hunter · Jefferson & Clearfield Coal & Iron Co. v. United States · Columbia Properties, Inc. v. State Board of Tax Commissioners · Bassing v. Cady
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.
“We have recently had occasions to discuss the difference between the Habitual Criminal Act and the Narcotic Drug Act, insofar as these two statutes relate to subsequent convictions. [Citations omitted.] The Habitual Criminal Act is fairly definite as to how charges should be made. . . . However, the above quoted statute [the Narcotic Drug Act] is completely lacking in any legislative direction as to procedures in the event of second and subsequent convictions. Thus the comparison made by the attorney general between the Narcotic Drug Act and the Habitual Criminal Act is of no assistance. [Our emphasis.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Santillanes“[Ejssential fairness requires that there be some pleading filed by the state, whether it be by motion or otherwise, by which a defendant is given notice and opportunity to be heard before an increased penalty can be imposed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Stout“In this case, there was never any charge filed against this appellant which would give him notice that, if convicted, he would be sentenced as a second offender, [our emphasis.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Santillanes
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.