State v. Alexander’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
55 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably State v. Afanador (1997), State v. Cooper (1997)
55 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. Green · State v. Butler · State v. Gerald · Town Tobacconist v. Kimmelman · State v. Davis
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A court's obligation properly to instruct and to guide a jury includes the duty to clarify statutory language that prescribes the elements of a crime when clarification is essential to ensure that the jury will fully understand and actually find those elements in determining the defendant's guilt.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“statutes containing words whose meanings are ordinary and understandable often require a judicial determination with respect to their intended scope of application.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“(1) that the defendant conspired with at least two others; (2) that the defendant was an organizer, supervisor, financier, or manager; (3) that the defendant engaged in a conspiracy for profit; and (4) that the conspiracy included a scheme or course of conduct unlawfully to manufacture, distribute, dispense, or transport a controlled dangerous substance. [Alexander, supra, 136 N.J. at 568 , 643 A.2d 996 .]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.