State v. Wildenstein’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently December 2008
2 federal appellate · 18 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 Richardson v. Hynson, Westcott & Dunning, Inc. · United States v. MacCollom · State v. Hines · State v. Moser · State v. Williams
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * Thus, defendant claims that he has a right to hunt for a basis to collaterally attack the 1959 conviction, and if the State fails to provide him the materials through which he wishes to hunt, due process is violated. Defendant was not entitled to a transcript to enable him to search that transcript in the hope of discovering a basis for collaterally attacking the 1959 conviction. State v. Toussaint, 84 N.M. 677 , 506 P.2d 1224 (Ct.App.1973); see United States v. MacCollom, [infra].” 577 P.2d at 452 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cutbirth v. State“Here the showing is that a partial transcript could be produced which would follow the “gist of the proceedings.” Thus the material parts, the essence, of the trial proceedings were available.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Fish
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.