Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2008 MT 297 - State v. MacKrill

State v. MacKrill’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
2
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Jacobsen v. Allstate Insurance (2009), State v. Guill (2010)

46 state decisions

220200820102020decided

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 State v. Just · 45 Cal. 3d 259 - People v. Lucky · State v. Matt · State v. Rosling · State v. Swann

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

  1. “Consent is ineffective if: (a) it is given by a person who is legally incompetent to authorize the conduct charged to constitute the offense; (b) it is given by a person who by reason of youth, mental disease or defect, or intoxication is unable to make a reasonable judgment as to the nature or harmfulness of the conduct charged to constitute the offense; (c) it is induced by force, duress, or deception; or (d) it is against public policy to permit the conduct or the resulting harm, even though consented to.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““may discretionarily review a claimed error that implicates a criminal defendant’s fundamental constitutional rights-even if a timely objection was not made in the trial court, and notwithstanding the inapplicability of the criteria set forth in § 46-20-701(2), MCA-where failing to review the claimed error may result in a manifest miscarriage of justice, may leave unsettled the question of the fundamental fairness of the trial or proceedings, or may compromise the integrity of the judicial process.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A]dmissibility under the transaction rule is based upon the jury's right to hear what occurred immediately prior and subsequent to the commission of the offense charged, so that they may evaluate the evidence in the context in which the criminal act occurred.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.