State v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
54 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably State v. Meadors (1995), State v. Rhode (1999)
54 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 111 (Federal Judiciary Protection Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 924
Relies on Blockburger v. United States · Brown v. Ohio · Whalen v. United States · McBoyle v. United States · United States v. Evans
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is a well-settled principal [sic] of law that criminal statutes must be strictly construed. [Citations omitted.] This principle extends not only to the elements of the substantive crime, but also to the sanctions potentially involved.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Sivak · State v. Kaiser“A statute defining a crime must be sufficiently explicit so that all persons subject thereto may know that conduct on their part will subject them to its penalties. [Citations omitted.] A criminal statute must give a clear and unmistakable warning as to the acts which will subject one to criminal punishment, and courts are without power to supply what the legislature has left vague. [Citations omitted.] An act cannot be held as criminal under a statute unless it clearly appears from the language used that the legislature so intended. [Citations omitted.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Woolf · State v. Morrison““An ‘included offense’ is one which is necessarily committed in the commission of another offense; or one, the essential elements of which are charged in the information as the manner or means by which the offense was committed.” 86 Idaho at 69 , 383 P.2d at 605-06 (emphasis added) (citing State v. Anderson, 82 Idaho 293, 301 , 352 P.2d 972, 977 (1960)).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Padilla
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.