State v. Moreno’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently February 2012
19 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 Chimel v. California · New York v. Belton · Dade County v. Lake Lucerne Civic Ass'n · Dade County v. Lake Lucerne Civic Ass'n · State v. Pena
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The factual findings underlying a trial court's decision to grant or deny a motion to suppress evidence are reviewed under the deferential clearly-erroneous standard, and the legal conclusions are reviewed for correctness, with a measure of discretion given to the trial judge's application of the legal standard to the facts.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Grossi · State v. Warren“[a]lthough search incident to arrest was not the ground relied upon by the trial court, this court may affirm the trial court’s decision on any proper ground.” State v. Moreno, 910 P.2d 1245 , 1247 n. 1 (Utah App.), cert. denied, 916 P.2d 909 (Utah 1996). . Similarly, the Utah Supreme Court in State v. Austin held”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Wells
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.