Trim v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 2026
8 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 Miller v. California · Plyler v. Doe · Evitts v. Lucey · Smith v. People of the State of California · Brockett v. Spokane Arcades, Inc.
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“However, the State is not required to prove the Defendant knew the exact content or that he actually had seen or read the material, but only that he knew the nature and character of the material distributed. Also, it is immaterial whether the Defendant did or did not believe the material to be obscene.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Davis 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.