Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 94 N.M. 539 - State v. Haar

State v. Haar’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
2
states following
August 1994
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Tucker · Gardner v. Florida · Baldwin v. New York · Codispoti v. Pennsylvania · Ludwig v. Massachusetts

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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[f]irst, it aids the court in terms of uniformity and equal sentencing — the probation office being a repository of information to achieve the goal of making the punishment fit the crime in each case. Second, if a judge treats a defendant in a manner more lenient than that recommended, the probation office may encounter difficulty in supervising that individual as a probationer or a parolee. Third, the person who would benefit most from disclosure of the information would be counsel. He could prepare or not, depending on what recommendation is given. Counsel should always be prepared to do his best to aid his client at sentencing.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “whenever a defendant is exposed to a term of confinement of over six months, he is entitled to a jury”
    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.