State v. Lindsley’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably State v. Wilkinson (2002), State v. Guilliams (2004)
28 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 State v. Scherr · State v. French · State v. Cummings · State v. Wideman · State v. Morris
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The fact that the victim was in court at all was a direct result of defendant’s crime. She did not ‘choose’ to attend the hearings as a disinterested bystander might, but because she was the victim of defendant’s actions and, thus, unavoidably entwined in the criminal proceedings. But for defendant’s criminal actions, the victim certainly would not have been present at the proceedings. It is a direct result of a crime that the victim attends the hearings and thus suffers wage loss. We believe it makes no difference whether the victim attended pursuant to subpoena or not.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Madrid“any loss incurred by a person as a result of the commission of an offense. Economic loss includes lost interest, lost earnings and other losses which would not have been incurred but for the offense. Economic loss does not include losses incurred by the convicted person, damages for pain and suffering, punitive damages or consequential damages.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Wilkinson“Although we previously said if a loss is a `foreseeable' loss it is not merely a consequential loss ... the proper focus is upon how directly the loss flows from the defendant's acts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Brendan G.
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.