Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2007 ME 151 - State v. Woo

State v. Woo’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently August 2024

9 state decisions

50200720102020decided

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 People v. Lancellotti · State v. Ullring · Dawson v. State · State v. Barnard · State v. Kenney

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

  1. “the jury could have rationally found beyond a reasonable doubt that [the defendant] unlawfully trafficked in what was, in fact, a scheduled drug”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “the jury [to] reasonably infer[] that [the defendant] successfully manufactured methamphetamine,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “and the drug is . . . [a] schedule W drug.”
    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.