Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 200 N.J. Super. 488 - State v. Potts

200 N.J. Super. 488 - State v. Potts’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
July 1992
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Dalglish · In Re the Suspension or Revocation of the License of DeMarco · 67 N.J. Super. 414 - State v. Johnson · 195 N.J. Super. 354 - State v. Curtis · State ex rel. A. W. S.

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

  1. “If a driver who recklessly causes an accident resulting in serious bodily injury to another person may be charged with a criminal offense under N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(b)(1), a second degree offense, as well as charged with a motor vehicle violation, does it not logically follow that a driver who recklessly causes an accident resulting in another's death may similarly be charged with a criminal offense carrying a penalty at least equal to the penalty imposed for causing serious bodily injury? [ State v. Potts, 200 N.J. Super. at 493 ].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[T]he elements of the death by auto statute and the aggravated manslaughter statute overlap, but are not identical. Aggravated manslaughter has an additional element which the State must prove. The element of culpability is greater than mere recklessness. It is recklessness under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life. See State v. Curtis, 195 N.J. Super. 354 (App.Div. 1984) (distinction between aggravated and reckless manslaughter). [ Id. at 495 ].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “It is an absurdity to conclude that the Legislature intended to limit criminal homicide prosecutions to N.J.S.A. 2C:11-5 simply because the instrumentality causing the death was a vehicle instead of another device which in the manner it is used is known to be capable of producing death or serious bodily injury. N.J.S.A. 2C:11-1(c). [ State v. Potts, 200 N.J. Super. at 493 ].”
    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.