Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 115 P3D 517 - Michael v. State

Michael v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
June 2024
most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Johnson v. State (2014), Simon v. State (2005)

26 state decisions

160200520102020decided

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 Benboe v. State · Rudden v. State

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

  1. “By any realistic measure, Michael's overall conduct ranks among the least serious within the class of defendants actually convicted of first-degree sexual assault.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “We hold that the correct standard of review of a' superior court's application of statutory aggravating and "mitigatihg factors to a given set of facts is de novo review. The existence of non-existence of an aggravating or mitigating factor is a mixed question of law and fact. The determination of whether the defendant's conduct is among the least serious conduct within the definition of the offense involves a two-step process: the court must (1) assess the nature of the defendant's conduct, [which is] a factual finding, and then (2) make the legal determination of whether that conduct falls within the statutory standard of "among the least serious conduct within the definition of the offense." Any factual findings made by the court regarding the nature of the defendant's conduct are reviewed for clear error, but whether those facts establish that the conduct "is among the least serious" under AS 12.55. 155(d)(9) is a legal question.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.