Swan v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
1 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2018 · most notably Commonwealth v. Brown (2012), Ortiz v. State (2005)
1 district · 24 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. Olano · Ring v. Arizona · Wheat v. United States · Mickens v. Taylor · Lilly v. Virginia
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A statement is not hearsay if ... [t]he statement is offered against a party and is ... a statement by a co-conspirator of a party during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy; provided that the conspiracy has first been established by the preponderance of the evidence to the satisfaction of the court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Swan v. State“even when prejudicial error is committed, it will usually be cured by the trial judge's instruction to the jury to disregard the remarks.”). . Appendix to Appellant's Op. Br. at 20. . Id. . There is no per se rule that the use of the word”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Derose v. State“In Brice , this Court addressed several questions concerning the 2002 amendment to § 4209, and held that Ring only extends to the narrowing phase of the sentencing process.”). 73 . Brice v. State, 815 A.2d at 322 . 74 . Id. 75 . Id. (”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ortiz v. State
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.