Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 933 SW2D 843 - State v. Tivis

State v. Tivis’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently December 2018

19 state decisions

90199620002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance v. United States · Carolco Television Inc. v. National Broadcasting Co. · Deboue v. Louisiana · CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Easterwood

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.

  1. “No offense committed and no fine, penalty or forfeiture incurred, or prosecution commenced or pending previous to or at the time when any statutory provision is repealed or amended, shall be affected by the repeal or amendment, but the trial and punishment of all such offenses, and the recovery of the fines, penalties or forfeitures shall be had, in all respects, as if the provision had not been repealed or amended, except: (2)That if the penalty or punishment for any offense is reduced or lessened by any alteration of the law creating the offense prior to original sentencing, the penalty or punishment shall be assessed according to the amendatory law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[Police photographs] are readily admissible into evidence where all identifying information is masked, where a defendant’s identity is in issue and where admission of the [police photographs] will help a jury to determine the accuracy of the identification. The admission of a [police photograph] constitutes prejudicial evidence of other crimes only when the ['police photograph] or accompanying testimony discloses a defendant’s prior arrests or convictions.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “No offense committed and no fine, penalty or forfeiture incurred ... shall be affected by the repeal or amendment ... except: [[Image here]] (2) That if the penalty or punishment for any offense is reduced or lessened by any alteration of the law creating the offense prior to original sentencing, the penalty or punishment shall be assessed according to the amendatory law.”
    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.