Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1999 UT App 220 - State v. Pearson

1999 UT App 220 - State v. Pearson’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
October 2025
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently October 2025

6 state decisions

301999200020102020decided

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. James · 15 Utah 2d 422 - Holland v. Brown · State v. Bryant · State v. Souza · State v. Warden

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

  1. “(bly selectively applying the mens rea to some, but not all, of the elements of the offense, the jury could easily have believed defendant was strictly liable for [the remaining element].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “' "power to review a jury verdict challenged on grounds of insufficient evidence is limited.”
    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.