State v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis
1939
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently July 1970
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 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 Commonwealth v. Winter · State v. Gaines · Commonwealth v. Retkovitz · State v. Church · People v. . McElvaine
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Mental condition at time of trial. If before or during the trial in any criminal ease the court has reasonable ground to believe that the defendant, against whom an indictment has been found or an information filed, is insane or mentally defective to the extent that he is unable to understand the proceedings against him or to assist in his defense, the court shall immediately fix a time for a hearing to determine the defendant’s mental condition. The court may appoint one or more disinterested qualified experts to examine the defendant with regard to his present mental condition and to testify at the hearing. Other evidence regarding the defendant’s mental condition may be introduced at the hearing by either party.” “Morbid propensity to commit prohibited act as a defense. A morbid propensity to commit a prohibited act, existing in the mind of a person who is not shown to have been incapable of knowing the wrongfulness of the act, forms no defense to a prosecution for committing the act.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cannon v. Gladden““Whether there were reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant was insane, under chapter 293, Oregon Laws 1937 [now ORS 136.-410], was a question for the discretion of the trial court. State v. Peterson, 90 Wash. 479 , 156 P. 542 ; People v. McElvaine, 125 N.Y. 596 , 26 N.E. 929 ; State v. Stone, 111 Or. 227 , 226 P. 430 ; 16 C.J. 789, 790, § 2015. There was no abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court to refuse to have a further hearing under the circumstances. * * *»”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cannon v. Gladden
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.