State v. Sutphin’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably State v. Rudolfo (2008), State v. Silva (2008)
48 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 In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Pace v. Superintendent State Correctional Institution at Graterford · State v. Sutphin · State v. Cunningham · Gomez v. United States District Court for Northern District of California a-767
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.
“For you to find the defendant guilty of forgery [as charged in Count -], the state must prove to your satisfaction beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements of the crime: 1. The defendant gave or delivered to - (name of victim) a - (name of writing) knowing it to [be a false —] [have a false signature] [have a false endorsement] [have been changed so that its effect was different from the original or genuine] intending to injure, deceive or cheat - (name of victim) or another; 2. This happened in New Mexico on or about the — day of-,-.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Caldwell“fundamental error occurs when the trial court fails to instruct the jury on an essential element.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Sena“in the context of the individual facts and circumstances of the case,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Silva
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.