State v. LaBounty’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently October 2020
22 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 Bell v. United States · 38 Cal. 3d 345 - Wilkoff v. Superior Court · 96 Wis. 2d 48 - State v. Rabe · State v. Pelican · State v. Oscarson
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“defines the act of grossly negligent operation in terms of driving, not in terms of the consequences that might result from driving negligently[,] . . . while injuries resulting from the driver's gross negligence serve only to enhance a convicted violator's punishment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Martin“[t]he question thus becomes whether the actus reus prohibited by the statute is the act of driving negligently, which defendant committed only once, or the act of causing serious injury, which defendant committed twice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Martin“[a] person who operates a motor vehicle on a public highway in a grossly negligent manner shall be guilty of grossly negligent operation,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Martin
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.