State v. Gonzalez’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
77 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently May 2014 · most notably State v. Dillihay (1992), State v. Maldonado (1994)
77 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 North Carolina v. Pearce · Bibby v. United States · Albernaz v. United States · Grady v. Corbin · Gore 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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a. Any person who violates subsection a. of N.J.S.[A.] 2C:35-5 by distributing, dispensing or possessing with intent to distribute a controlled dangerous substance or controlled substance analog while in, on or within 500 feet of the real property comprising a public housing facility, a public park, or a public building is guilty of a crime of the second degree, except that it is a crime of the third degree if the violation involved less than one ounce of marijuana. c. Notwithstanding the provisions of N.J.S [A.] 2C:l-8 or any other provisions of law, a conviction arising under this section shall not merge with a conviction for a violation of subsection a. of N.J.S.[A] 2C:35-5 (manufacturing, distributing or dispensing) or N.J.S.[A.] 2G:35-6 (employing a juvenile in a drug distribution scheme). Nothing in this section shall be construed to preclude or limit a prosecution or conviction for a violation of N.J.S.lA] 2C:35-7 or any other offense defined in this chapter.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.