State v. Roybal’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
4 district · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably State v. Hampton (2012), State v. Williams (2006)
4 district · 37 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 United States v. Healy · Sattazahn v. Pennsylvania · State v. Rojo · United States v. Ibarra · United States v. Barnard
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“there is no specific language in the [venue] statute requiring the chosen venue to be the county with the most significant contacts or the more substantial nexus with the criminal acts of [the d]efendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Cruz“venue was established by a preponderance of the evidence in Santa Fe County, [and] the [district] court erred in dismissing the charges.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Cruz“trial may be had in any county in which a material element of the crime was committed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Cruz
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.