State v. Montoya’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently April 2023 · most notably State v. Laney (2003), Marquez-Marquez v. Gonzales (2006)
4 federal appellate · 22 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 State v. Sutphin · State v. Garcia · State v. Apodaca · State v. Parish · 117 Ill. 2d 170 - People v. Brackett
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.
“The State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant’s act was a significant cause of the death of [the victim]. Evidence has been presented that the negligence of a person other than the defendant may have contributed to the cause of death. Such contributing negligence does not relieve the defendant of responsibility for an act that significantly contributed to the cause of the death so long as the death was a foreseeable result of the defendant’s actions. However, if you find the negligence of a person other than the defendant was the only significant cause of death, then the defendant is not guilty of the offense of [name of offense].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. AUGUSTIN M.“In addition to the other elements of the crime of [vehicular homicide] ..., the state must also prove ... beyond a reasonable doubt that 1. The death was a foreseeable result of the defendant’s act; 2. The act of the defendant was a significant cause of the death of [the victim]. The defendant’s act was a significant cause of death if it was an act which, in a natural and continuous chain of events, uninterrupted by an outside event, resulted in the death and without which the death would not have occurred.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. AUGUSTIN M.“For you to find the Defendant guilty of criminal sexual penetration while committing another felony as charged in the alternative to Count [_], the State must prove to your satisfaction beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements of the crime: 1. The Defendant caused [Victim] to engage in [sex act]; 2. The Defendant committed the act during the commission of violating official acts prohibited; ... 3. This happened in New Mexico on or about ... [date].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Maestas
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.