State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably State v. Marquez (1997), State v. Hughes (1988)
29 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. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on Blockburger v. United States · Russell v. United States · Local 408, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. National Labor Relations Board · Hartman v. United States · Lister v. United States
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]ny act which is chargeable or indictable under the laws of New Mexico and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year, involving any of the following cited offenses: (1) murder, as provided in Section 30-2-1 NMSA 1978; (2) robbery, as provided in Section 30-16-2 NMSA 1978; (3) kidnapping, as provided in Section 30-4-1 NMSA 1978; (4) forgery, as provided in Section 30-16-10 NMSA 1978; (5) larceny, as provided in Section 30-16-1 NMSA 1978; (6) fraud, as provided in Section 30-16-6 NMSA 1978; (7) embezzlement, as provided in Section 30-16-8 NMSA 1978; (8) receiving stolen property, as provided in Section 30-16-11 NMSA 1978; (9) bribery, as provided in Sections 30-24-1 through 30-24-3 NMSA 1978; (10) gambling, as provided in Sections 30-19-3, 30-19-13 and 30-19-15 NMSA 1978; (11) illegal kickbacks, as provided in Sections 30-41-1 and 30-41-2 NMSA 1978; (12) extortion, as provided in Section 30-16-9 NMSA 1978; (13) trafficking in controlled substances, as provided in Section 30-31-20 NMSA 1978; (14) arson and aggravated arson, as provided in Subsection A of Section 30-17-5 and Section 30-17-6 NMSA 1978; (15) promoting prostitution, as provided in Section 30-9-4 NMSA 1978; (16) criminal solicitation, as provided in Section 30-28-3 NMSA 1978; (17) fraudulent securities practices, as provided in Sections 58-13-39 and 58-13-40 NMSA 1978 [repealed]; and (18)loan sharking, as provided in Sections 30-43-1 through 30-43-5 NMSA 1978;”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Maxwell v. Wilson“No variance between those allegations of a complaint, indictment, information or any supplemental pleading which state the particulars of the offense, whether amended or not, and the evidence offered in support thereof shall be ground for the acquittal of the defendant unless such variance prejudices substantial rights of the defendant. The court may at any time allow the indictment or information to be amended in respect to any variance to conform to the evidence. If the court finds that the defendant has been prejudiced by an amendment, the court may postpone the trial or grant such other relief as may be proper under the circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Marquez“New Mexico's Racketeering Act ... evinces an implicit legislative intent that the crime of racketeering constitutes a separate and distinct offense apart from the enumerated predicate crimes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Loza
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.