Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 9 Ariz. App. 369 - State v. Cadena

9 Ariz. App. 369 - State v. Cadena’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
2
states following
November 2020
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently November 2020

17 state decisions

1201969197019801990200020102020decided

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 70 Cal. 2d 347 - People v. Curtis · State v. Little · State of Arizona v. Guerrero · 7 Ariz. App. 117 - State v. Veres · Harding v. State

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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Under the general common law rule, excessive force used by an officer effecting an arrest may be countered lawfully. People v. Curtis, 70 Cal.2d 347 , 74 Cal.Rptr. 713 , 450 P.2d 33 (1969). In Arizona a person illegally arrested can resist arrest as long as he uses such force as is reasonably necessary, short of homicide. Dugan v. State, 54 Ariz. 247 , 94 P.2d 873 (1939). It is considered unreasonable to inflict bodily harm to effect an arrest for a misdemeanor or if there are other reasonable methods of effecting the arrest.” A.R.S. § 13-1401; Harding v. State, 26 Ariz. 334 , 225 P. 482 (1924). Id. at 372 , 452 P.2d at 537 . (emphasis added)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “But, when the misconduct bears an inferential connection with a factual issue in the case, the consideration of the discomfiture of the witness must yield to the ascertainment of the truth, at least to the extent of permitting cross-examination, [citation omitted], and, if the inferential connection is sufficiently strong, to the extent of permitting independent evidence of the conduct. [citation omitted].” 9 Ariz.App. at 294, 451 P.2d at 652 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.