State v. Quick’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

31 state decisions

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

1. “Although this case involves two different possession-based offenses, nothing in the language of the statutes at issue suggests to us that the actus reus of these crimes—the control of all of a particular type of controlled substance by the defendant at a given time— should be construed differently.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 1 N.M. Ct. App. 600 - State v. Ballard

2. “[distinctness may be established by determining whether the acts constituting the two offenses [were] ... separated by time or space”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Urioste

3. “the prohibited act is simply possession of a particular controlled substance”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 1 N.M. Ct. App. 600 - State v. Ballard