Brown v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Ex Parte Goodbread (1998), Hill v. State (2002)
33 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 Green v. United States · United States v. Jorn · Arizona v. Washington · Oregon v. Kennedy · Wade v. Hunter
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“carefully and deliberately consider which of all the alternatives best balances the defendant's interest in having [the] trial concluded in a single proceeding with society's `interest in fair trials designated to end in just judgments.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Hunter · Ex Parte Fierro“As a general rule, after a jury has been impaneled and sworn, thus placing the defendant in jeopardy, double jeopardy bars a re-trial if the jury is discharged without reaching a verdict.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The record clearly reveal two less drastic alternatives which were available to the trial judge in lieu of a mistrial: (1) Beasley was available to testify out-of-sequence ... or (2) Valadez could have testified in Beasley’s stead. The trial judge was aware of these alternatives but neglected to address them. Moreover, the Court of Appeals did not address the trial judge’s failure to consider and rule out these alternatives. Because less drastic alternatives were available, the record does not support the trial judge’s conclusion that there was manifest necessity for a mistrial.” Id. at 843 (emphasis in original).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ex Parte Fierro
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.