Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 129 N.M. 321 - State v. Hamilton

State v. Hamilton’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
April 2022
most recently cited

2 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently April 2022

2 district · 14 state decisions

100200020102020decided

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 State v. Rowell · State v. Woodward · State v. Sanders · State v. Beachum · State v. Aguayo

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

  1. “It is in this context that the court stated: the determination of whether a defendant who seizes a weapon during the commission of a robbery is armed ‘while’ committing the robbery is highly fact sensitive. When the defendant acquires the weapon and how he uses it after its acquisition are paramount.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In order to admit evidence under [this Rule], the court must find that the evidence is relevant to a disputed issue other than the defendant's character, and it must determine that the prejudicial effect of the evidence does not outweigh its probative value. . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity or absence of mistake or accident.”
    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.