Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 904 P.2d 1101 - State v. Wright

State v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
August 2012
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently August 2012

5 state decisions

30199520002010decided

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 North Carolina v. Pearce · State v. Holland · State v. Curry

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

  1. “It is the law of this state, as announced in State v. Curry, 814 P.2d 1150 (Utah Ct.App.1991) (per curiam), that a sentence is not entered until it has been reduced to writing and signed by the court.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'the oral statement from the court regarding [the] defendant's sentence was not reduced to writing, and thus [the] defendant's sentence was not entered until [the date it was reduced to writing and signed].'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[tJhere is no judgment, there is no sentence until I sign those papers.”
    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.