Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 148 N.M. 452 - State v. Jackson

State v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

2010

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
3
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

33 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State Ex Rel. Helman v. Gallegos · State v. NICK R. · State v. Duran · Cooper v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. · State v. Foulenfont

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

  1. “A. Tampering with evidence consists of destroying, changing, hiding, placing or fabricating any physical evidence with intent to prevent the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of any person or to throw suspicion of the commission of a crime upon another. B. Whoever commits tampering with evidence shall be punished as follows: (1) if the highest crime for which tampering with evidence is committed is a capital or first degree felony or a second degree felony, the person committing tampering with evidence is guilty of a third degree felony; (2) if the highest crime for which tampering with evidence is committed is a third degree felony or a fourth degree felony, the person committing tampering with evidence is guilty of a fourth degree felony; (3) if the highest crime for which tampering with evidence is committed is a misdemeanor or a petty misdemeanor, the person committing tampering with evidence is guilty of a petty misdemeanor; and (4) if the highest crime for which tampering with evidence is committed is indeterminate, the person committing tampering with evidence is guilty of a fourth degree felony.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Tampering with evidence is uniquely offensive under the criminal code because when one acts intentionally to destroy, change, hide, place or fabricate physical evidence, that person seeks to deprive the criminal justice system of information.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “where no underlying crime could be identified.”
    1 later decision 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.