Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2004 NMCA 35 - State v. Moore

State v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
4
states following
March 2023
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently March 2023 · most notably State v. Paredez (2004), State v. Garcia (2005)

36 state decisions

200200420102020decided

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 Boykin v. Alabama · North Carolina v. Alford · Brady v. United States · Doe v. Poritz · 6 Cal. 4th 367 - People v. McClellan

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

  1. “In New Mexico, a plea agreement must be interpreted, understood, and approved by the trial court. A court is not to accept a guilty plea absent an affirmative showing on the record that the plea was voluntary and intelligent. The defendant must understand his guilty plea and its consequences. The burden is on [the djefendant to demonstrate that the failure to comply with the prescribed plea procedure prejudiced his ability to knowingly and voluntarily enter his plea.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “the consequences of a plea are quite serious. . . . [W]e think there is little question that adequate pre-plea knowledge of the SORNA registration and notification consequences of a plea ought to be a part of criminal procedure.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “a court's failure to advise a [defendant] of SORNA registration and notification requirements does not render a plea involuntary or otherwise rise to the level of a . . . due process violation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.