Lee v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
67 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Reed v. State (2006), State v. Stevens (2006)
67 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 United States v. Arnett · White v. State · United States v. Baldacchino · United States v. Reardon · Carnine 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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] plea agreement is contractual in nature, binding the defendant, the state and the trial court. The prosecutor and the defendant are the contracting parties, and the trial courts role with respect to their agreement is described by statute: If the court accepts a plea agreement, it shall be bound by its terms.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a] defendant 'may not enter a plea agreement calling for an illegal sentence, benefit from that sentence, and then later complain that it was an illegal sentence.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Parham · Gonzales v. State“if the parties would have entered the bargain absent the illegal portion of the original agreement.”
5 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.