State v. Youpee’s Empirical Analysis
1936
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 1999
12 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 United States v. Kagama · Donnelly v. United States · United States v. Felipe Sandoval · United States v. Sam Pelican · United States v. Fred Nice
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It may be taken as settled beyond controversy that, where a crime is committed within the boundaries of a state, the state courts have exclusive jurisdiction to try the defendant, unless some specific federal law vests jurisdiction in the federal courts. These specific laws, to be controlling here, must be found in the Federal Constitution, the acts of Congress, our Enabling Act or treaties between the United States and the tribe of Indians to which the defendant belongs. . . .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““There are numerous decisions in other state jurisdictions in harmony with ours, and a few to the contrary, and by the great preponderance of authority it is held that, as to crimes committed by Indians within a state, but without the bounds of ‘Indian country’ or other lands under the control of the United States, as heretofore referred to, it is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the state to try and punish such Indians.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Boe““We think the general rule well expressed in 21 Corpus Juris, Sections 128 and 130, pages 538 and 539, where it says: ‘It is usually held that a state court has no jurisdiction over crimes committed by or against Indians within a reservation, such jurisdiction being in the United States or the tribal courts; but there are a few decisions, most of them early ones, to the contrary.’ ” (Emphasis in original.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Greenwalt
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.