Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2002 ND 145 - State v. Yineman

State v. Yineman’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
states following
January 2026
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably State v. Rourke (2017), State v. Schmeets (2009)

23 state decisions

130200220102020decided

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 Tibbs v. Florida · United States v. Lincoln · United States v. Atkinson · State v. Kringstad · State v. Tweed

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

  1. ““To establish obvious errqr under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52(b), the defendant has the burden to show (1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) that affects substantial rights. We exercise our power to notice obvious error cautiously, and only in exceptional circumstances where the accused has suffered serious injustice. In determining whether there has been obvious error, we examine the entire record and the probable effect of the alleged error in light of all of the evidence.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “`concludes that evidence is legally insufficient to support a guilty verdict, it concludes that the prosecution has failed to produce sufficient evidence to prove its case. The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution bars retrial in such a case.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “necessary to prompt the judge to review evidence with an eye to the significant act of removing the case from the jury.”
    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.