State v. Raine’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently April 2016
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 Barker v. Wingo · American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance v. United States · Porzig v. Nolden · Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman · Stringer v. Mississippi
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.
““Appellate review of a motion court’s action is limited to a determination of the findings and conclusions of whether the motion court are clearly erroneous.” State v. Blankenship, 830 S.W.2d 1, 16 (Mo. banc 1992). A claim is not properly preserved for review where it is not presented to the motion court. Amrine v. State, 785 S.W.2d 531, 535 (Mo. banc), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 881 , 111 S.Ct. 227 , 112 L.Ed.2d 181 (1990).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Zelinger
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.