State v. Greene’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently November 2010
15 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 State v. Cannady · State v. Spencer · State v. Miller · State v. Burnfin · State v. Hornbeck
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Hombeck, the court reversed the conviction of a defendant where the trial court had allowed the prosecutor over objections to accuse defense counsel of conspiring to prevent a witness’ testimony; in other words the prosecutor accused defense counsel of conspiring to commit a crime. In Greene , the prosecuting attorney strongly implied that the defense counsel was lying to the jury. Although the trial judge sustained defendant counsel’s objections, the trial court refused to instruct the jury to disregard the prosecutor’s statement. This Court said that “[statements, without basis in the record, that defendant’s counsel acted improperly, are error, as they degrade the defense.” [citation omitted].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Reyes“It is unfortunate when prosecuting officials with otherwise strong evidence in support of a conviction choose to go beyond the legitimate evidence that is available to them and pursue other inflammatory and irrelevant triviality in quest of conviction. When this occurs, the result of appellate review is assured.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. McClanahan“Prosecuting officials have the duty to prosecute cases with vigor, but they have the duty to do so within the bounds of rules of evidence and within the procedural boundaries prescribed for the conduct of criminal trials.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. McClanahan
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.