State v. Bell’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
1 district · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably State v. Verde (1989), State v. Rimmasch (1989)
1 district · 42 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on Michigan v. Long · Vandygriff v. Phillips · Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCann · Hannahville Indian Community v. United States · Gometz v. United States
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.
“Article I, section 12 of the Utah Constitution guarantees, [i]n criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right ... to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him and to have a copy thereof.... [W]e explained that this provision requires that the accused be given sufficient information so that he or she can know the particulars of the alleged wrongful conduct and can adequately prepare his or her defense.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Klenz · State v. Younge“only when the information or indictment is constitutionally deficient by reason of its failure to inform of the nature and cause of the offense charged.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Swapp · State v. Younge“a credible argument that the prosecutor's errors have impaired the defense.”
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.