Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 N.M. 268 - State v. Ramirez

State v. Ramirez’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
1
states following
November 2009
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently November 2009 · most notably State v. Clark (1989), State v. Isiah (1989)

32 state decisions

180198219902000decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Griffin v. California · State v. Baca · State v. Lara · State v. Trujillo

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

  1. “The Court of Appeals in State v. Lara, [ 88 N.M. 233, 234 , 539 P.2d 623, 624 (Ct.App.1975)], held that any reference to the defendant’s silence had an intolerable prejudicial impact that would require a new trial. In State v. Baca, 89 N.M. 204 , 549 P.2d 282 (1976), we limited State v. Lara, supra, to those times when the prosecutor is directly responsible for the improper comment on the defendant’s silence. (Baca involved the unsolicited statements of a policeman witness). [Emphasis in original omitted.] In the present case [the prosecutor] commented directly on [the defendant’s] silence in his closing argument to the jury in violation of the fifth amendment. Under both Lara and Baca such a comment by the prosecutor constitutes fundamental error and mandates a new trial.”
    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.