Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 179 Mont. 271 - State v. Gone

State v. Gone’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
4
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably State v. Finley (1996), State v. Coleman (1979)

4 federal appellate · 46 state decisions

250197819801990200020102020decided

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 Till v. New Mexico · Greenfield v. Scafati · State v. Walker · State v. Allison · State v. Pascgo

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

  1. ““. . . criminal intent, being a state of mind, is rarely susceptible of direct or positive proof and therefore must usually be inferred from the facts testified to by witnesses and the circumstances as developed by the evidence. The question of intent is a question for the jury.” State v. Pascgo (1977), 173 Mont. 121 , 566 P.2d 802, 805 , citing State v. Cooper (1971), 158 Mont. 102 , 489 P.2d 99 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.” Rule 404(b), Mont.R.Evid.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[a] law which eliminates or delays a defendant's parole eligibility after the criminal offense has been committed is ex post facto as applied to that defendant”
    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.