Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2001 UT 9 - State v. Clark

State v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
3
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

1 district · 51 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably State v. Nielsen (2014), State v. Hamilton (2003)

1 district · 51 state decisions

230200120102020decided

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 Illinois v. Gates · Taylor v. Meacham · State v. James · State v. Emmett · State v. Dibello

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

  1. “magistrate must view all evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the prosecution.”
    15 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"produce believable evidence of all the elements of the crime charged, just as it would have to do to survive a motion for a directed verdict. However, unlike a motion for a directed verdict, this evidence need not be capable of supporting a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, ... the quantum of evidence necessary to support a bindover is less than that necessary to survive a directed verdict motion."”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “sufficient evidence to support a reasonable belief that an offense has been committed and that the defendant committed it.”
    11 later decisions 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.