State v. Bollander’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 2019
21 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 49 Ill. 2d 338 - The People v. McCabe
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“4. “Cannabis” means the following substances under whatever names they may be designated: (a) The resin extracted from any part of a plant of the genus cannabis, and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture or preparation of such plant, its seeds or its resin. Cannabis does not include oil or cake made from the seeds of such plant, any fiber, compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture or preparation of the mature stalks of such plant except the resin extracted from the stalks or any fiber, oil or cake or the sterilized seed of such plant which is incapable of germination. (b) Every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture or preparation of such resin or tetrahydrocannabinol. 16. “Marijuana” means all parts of any plant of the genus cannabis, from which the resin has not been extracted, whether growing or not, and the seeds of such plant. Marijuana does not include the mature stalks of such plant or the sterilized seed of such plant which is incapable of germination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Medina““ * * * while sale of marijuana is punishable under § 36-1002.07 A.R.S., all other cannabis derivatives, including hashish, are punishable under § 36-1002.-02 A.R.S. In short, we do not believe that the legislature intended that a person who sells hashish could be prosecuted and punished for the sale of marijuana, and we hold that where a defendant is specifically charged with the unlawful sale of marijuana, it is not sufficient to show that the substance sold was hashish. * * *State v. Bollander, 110 Ariz. 84, 87 , 515 P.2d 329, 332 (1973).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bollander““ ‘Cannabis’ includes the following substances under whatever names they may be designated. “(a) Marijuana. “(b) All parts of the plant cannabis sativa L., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof * * * (Emphasis added.) A.R.S. § 36-1001(13).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Zeiter
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.