Davila v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently May 2020 · most notably Asch v. State (2003), Snow v. State (2009)
30 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 28 U.S.C. § 455
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Chapman v. State of California · Johnson v. Zerbst · Gideon v. Wainwright · United States v. Wade
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the very power of the State to bring the defendant into court to answer the charge brought against him.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Popkin v. State · Protz v. State““When a criminal defendant has solemnly admitted in open court that he is in fact guilty of the offense with which he is charged, he may not thereafter raise independent claims relating to the deprivation of constitutional rights that occurred prior to the entry of the guilty plea.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Smith v. State · Nixon v. State“Davila's claim that he was improperly denied counsel at his preliminary hearing is nonjurisdictional. Denial of the right to representation does not implicate "the very power of the state to bring the defendant into court to answer the charge brought against him," Blackledge [v. Perry ], 417 U.S. [21] at 30, 94 S.Ct. [2098] at 2103, 40 L.Ed.2d [628] at 636 [(1974)], and would not have prevented a trial. The district court had jurisdiction to proceed to trial and, in fact, had it granted Davila's motion to dismiss, the state could have refiled and proceeded with a new preliminary hearing and trial. As a result, Davila's plea of nolo contendere waived his claim that he was denied counsel at his preliminary hearing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Doles 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.