State v. Cleve’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

168 state decisions

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

1. “Although [in Ibn Omar-Muhammad, 102 N.M. at 277-78 , 694 P.2d at 925-26 ,] we focused our inquiry on the elements of the two relevant crimes, we now clarify that we did not intend to suggest that the elements of the crimes serve as the only relevant factor under the general/specific statute rule.... Thus, an inquiry under the general/specific statute rule should always focus primarily on whether the Legislature intended that the specific law operate as an exception to the general law and whether the Legislature intended that certain criminal conduct be charged under one special law to the exclusion of other more general laws. This inquiry may include the elements of the crimes, the language of the statutes, the histories and purposes of the statutes, and other relevant indicia of legislative intent.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Santillanes · State v. Guilez

2. “ascertain and give effect to the intent of the Legislature.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Padilla · Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Las Uvas Valley Dairies (In re Las Uvas Valley Dairies)

3. “`to the extent of compelling the state to prosecute under [it].'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Santillanes · State v. Perea