Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 123 N.M. 734 - State v. Frank

State v. Frank’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
July 2002
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1151 (Indian Crimes Act of 1976)

Relies on North Carolina v. Alford · United States v. Mazurie · Pittsburg & Midway Coal Mining Co. v. Watchman · State Ex Rel. Human Services Department v. Coleman · United States v. South Dakota

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

  1. “(a) all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way running through the reservation, (b) all dependent Indian communities within the borders of the United States whether within the original or subsequently acquired territory thereof, and whether within or without the limits of a state, and (c) all Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-of-way running through the same.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““(1) whether the United States has retained ‘title to the lands which it permits the Indians to occupy’ and ‘authority to enact regulations and protective laws respecting this territory,’; (2) ‘the nature of the area in question, the relationship of the inhabitants in the area to Indian tribes and to the federal government, and the established practice of government agencies toward the area,’; (3) whether there is ‘an element of cohesiveness ... manifested either by economic pursuits in the area, common interests, or needs of the inhabitants as supplied by that locality,’; and (4) ‘whether such lands have been set apart for the use, occupancy and protection of dependent Indian peoples.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the accident occurred within the boundaries of a dependent Indian community, ... thus depriving the state of jurisdiction to prosecute Defendant of the criminal charges against him.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.