State v. Saenz’s Empirical Analysis
1960
Citation profile
43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably State v. Thompson (1966), State v. Fassler (1972)
43 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 Jencks v. United States · Costello v. United States · Pima County v. Bilby · Smith v. Moroney · State v. King
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * [T]he scope of review of an order granting a new trial is essentially the same in both civil and criminal proceedings, taking into consideration the differences in the applicable burdens of proof. In a civil case, where the plaintiff has the burden to prove his case by a preponderance of the evidence, the trial court may properly grant a new trial provided that the ‘probative force of the evidence does not clearly preponderate in favor of the verdict.’ (Pima County v. Bilby, supra, 87 Ariz. 366 , 351 P.2d 647 ). In a criminal proceeding, on the other hand, where the prosecution has the burden to prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the trial court does not abuse its discretion in granting defendant’s motion for a new trial unless the record shows that his guilt has clearly been ‘proved beyond a reasonable doubt’. (State v. Chase, supra.)” 88 Ariz. at 156, 353 P.2d at 1028 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Turner““We have held that at the time a police officer testifies in a case defendant has a'right to examine notes and reports of the officer in regard to the matters about which he has testified in order to determine whether they were inconsistent with or otherwise tended to discredit the officer’s testimony.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Preciado““We will not disturb an order granting a new trial unless1 the probative force of the evidence clearly demonstrates that the trial court’s action is wrong and unjust and therefore unreasonable and a manifest abuse of discretion.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. McIver
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.