Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 134 N.M. 294 - State v. Gardner

State v. Gardner’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
1
states following
March 2024
most recently cited

48 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably State v. Gallegos (2009), State v. Holly (2009)

48 state decisions

200200320102020decided

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 Apprendi v. New Jersey · State v. Rojo · State v. Sanders · State v. Sutphin · State v. Garcia

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

  1. “[c]oercion for the purposes of CSCM occurs when a defendant occupies a position which enables that person to exercise undue influence over the victim and that influence must be the means of compelling submission to the contact. ... [S]uch coercion might take many forms but is less overtly threatening than physical force or threats.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “the jury [may] infer a connection between [the d]efendant's position of authority and his sexual contact with the victims, which is sufficient to infer the existence of coercion”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “a relative who by reason of [his] relationship to [A.B.] was able to exercise undue influence over [A.B.] AND used this authority to coerce [A.B.] to submit to sexual contact.”
    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.