Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 76 Wyo. 82 - State v. Spears

State v. Spears’s Empirical Analysis

1956

Citation profile

81
cited by 81 later decisions
3
states following
December 2023
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 77 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably Pearce v. Cox (1965), Gayler v. State (1998)

2 federal appellate · 77 state decisions

28019561960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCann · Buchalter v. People of State of New York Weiss · Eagan v. State · Parker v. State · State v. Sorrentino

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

  1. “`From appellant's discussion * * * it seems that his main purpose in asking for a preliminary examination [or access to the grand jury testimony] was to obtain knowledge of the facts the state expected to prove at the trial. He was really seeking a disclosure of the state's evidence in order that he might prepare his defense. It is clear that under out statute a preliminary examination is not for that purpose. * * * There seems to be no rule of the common law or statute that gives a defendant the right before trial to pry into the state's case by obtaining a disclosure of its evidence, though there is authority for the view that the trial court has at least a discretionary power to permit the defendant to inspect documents or chattels for the purpose of obtaining information that will enable him to make a defense.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ * * * While there may be cases where the misconduct of such prosecuting attorney is so flagrant that the court would be warranted to reverse, even in the absence of such objections, the general rule is that the failure to interpose timely objections, giving the trial court an opportunity to make a ruling and cure an error, if possible, will be treated as a waiver. * * * ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"`* * * [I]t is not asking too much that the burden of showing essential unfairness be sustained by him who claims such injustice and seeks to have the result set aside, and that it be sustained not as a matter of speculation but as a demonstrable reality. * * *'"”
    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.