Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 151 N.W.2d 310 - State v. Moe

State v. Moe’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
2
states following
June 1991
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently June 1991

17 state decisions

901967197019801990decided

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 Railway Employes' Department v. Hanson · Christianson v. United States · State v. Carroll · State v. Pusch · Killmer v. Duchscherer

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

  1. ““We are of the opinion that for the purpose of impeachment the most reasonable practice, and the one generally prevailing, minimizing prejudice and distraction, is that beyond the name of the crime, the time and place of conviction, and the punishment, further details may not be inquired into. McCormick, Evidence § 43, at 92-93 (1954). * * *” State v. Moe, 151 N.W.2d 310, 320 (N.D.1967).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““A witness may be impeached on cross-examination by inquiries as to collateral facts tending to incriminate, disgrace, or degrade him, and, where such an inquiry is as to previous conviction on account of a criminal offense, it is not confined to conviction for felony.” State v. Fury, 53 N.D. 333 , 205 N.W. 877 (1925).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “We have also said: “. . . the determination of whether evidence is too remote to be relevant is left to the discretion of the trial judge, and his decision will not be reversed in the absence of clear proof of an abuse of that discretion.” State v. Moe, 151 N.W.2d 310, 316 (N.D.1967).”
    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.