State v. Garcia’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently December 2006 · most notably State v. Ogden (1994), State v. Wyrostek (1994)
43 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 Morningside Renewal Council, Inc. v. United States Atomic Energy Commission · State Ex Rel. Newsome v. Alarid · Barnett v. Malley · State v. McKinley · Transwestern Pipe Line Company v. Yandell
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]fter a petition has been filed alleging a delinquent act, the court may, before hearing the petition on its merits, transfer the matter for prosecution in the district court if: (1) the child was fifteen years of age or more at the time of the * * * alleged * * * delinquent act, and the alleged delinquent act is murder * * * or when the child was sixteen years of age or more and the alleged act is assault with intent to commit a violent felony * * * or kidnapping * * * or a felony criminal sexual penetration * * * or robbery * * * or aggravated burglary * * * or aggravated arson * * * (2) a hearing on whether the transfer shall be made is held * * * (3) notice in writing * * * of the hearing is given * * * (4) the court has considered whether the child is amenable to treatment or rehabilitation as a child through available facilities; and (5) the court makes a specific finding upon the hearing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the child committed the alleged delinquent act. [Emphasis supplied.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Doe“To require treatment of the same criminal episode partially in Juvenile Court and partially in adult court would serve no beneficial purposes believed to be derived from the creation of a system of juvenile courts. To permit fragmentation of the criminal transaction invites many possible problems, such as in sentencing, or with collateral estoppel, double jeopardy and merger. Fragmentation is also wasteful of prosecutorial, defense and judicial resources.”
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.