Moore v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently November 2024
20 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 Gleason v. State · Dysthe v. State · Wilks v. State · Ostrowski v. State · Mazurek v. State
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In a case in which there are multiple counts, each one is treated as if it were a separate indictment. The verdict on the various counts need not be consistent. An acquittal on one count does not prevent conviction of another, even though the evidence is the same and the defendant could not have committed one crime without committing both, so long as the evidence is sufficient to support conviction on the count on which a guilty verdict was reached.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[elvi-dence is always relevant if it tends to prove or disprove one of the elements of the crime charged.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Sweet v. State · Jensen v. State“Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed by referring to the entire record to determine whether a defendant's case has been so prejudiced that he has been denied a fair trial. Dysthe v. State, 2003 WY 20, 122 , 63 P.3d 875, 122 (Wyo.2003). Whether or not any comment within a closing argument is improper is measured in the context of the entire argument. Id. Reversal is warranted only if a reasonable probability exists that without the error the appellant may have enjoyed a more favorable verdict. Id. The defendant has the burden of proof to prove this issue. Id.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lewis v. State
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.