State v. Galan’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently November 2021
2 federal appellate · 15 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 72 Ill. 2d 16 - People v. Harris · 62 Ill. 2d 568 - People v. Viser · 68 Ill. 2d 198 - People v. Trinkle · Zickefoose v. State · 49 Wis. 2d 246 - State v. Melvin
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The defendant’s argument that an attempt still requires a specific intent which is incompatible with the reckless state of mind does not reckon with all of the language of A.R.S. § 13-1001, the attempt statute. We quote that provision again with emphasis on the words that the defendant’s argument ignores: A person commits attempt if, acting with the kind of culpability otherwise required for the commission of an offense, such person, (1) Intentionally engages in conduct which would constitute an offense if the attendant circumstances were as such person believes them to be. A common sense reading of the provision leads to the conclusion that the words “intentionally engages in conduct” refers in this case to the actions that make up trafficking like buying property intending to resell it (A.R.S. § 13-2301(B)(3)) and that the words “acting with the kind of culpability otherwise required for the commission of an offense” requires (sic) only that acts be accompanied by a reckless state of mind as to the circumstances attending the status of the property. A contrary conclusion would mean that the words “acting with the kind of culpability otherwise required for the commission of an offense” are superfluous.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Nunez“(A) A person commits attempt if, acting with the kind of culpability otherwise required for commission of an offense, such person: 1. Intentionally engages in conduct which would constitute an offense if the attendant circumstances were as such person believes them to be; or 2. Intentionally does or omits to do anything which, under the circumstances as such person believes them to be, is any step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in commission of an offense[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Nunez“This section adopts the view that the actor must have for his purpose to engage in the criminal conduct or accomplish the criminal result which is an element of the substantive crime but that his purpose need not encompass all the surrounding circumstances included in the formal definition of the substantive offense. As to them, it is sufficient that he acts with the culpability that is required for commission of a crime.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Nunez
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.