201 W. Va. 708 - State v. Riley’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
19
cited by 19 later decisions
5
states following
January 2017
most recently cited
2 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Blanton v. General Electric Credit Corp. · Cupp v. Murphy · 194 W. Va. 657 - State v. Guthrie · Johnson v. Florida · 196 W. Va. 294 - State v. LaRock
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Evidence of battered spouse syndrome has been found to be admissible for a criminal defendant in West Virginia for any of three purposes. First, it can be used to determine the defendant’s mental state where self-defense is asserted. See State v. Dozier, 163 W.Va. 192, 197-98 , 255 S.E.2d 552, 555 (1979). Second, it can be used to negate criminal intent. See State v. Lambert, 173 W.Va. 60, 63-64 , 312 S.E.2d 31, 35 (1984). Finally, in State v. Wyatt, 198 W.Va. 530 , 482 S.E.2d 147 (1996), we discussed the potential use of the battered spouse syndrome “to establish either the lack of malice, intention, or awareness, and thus negate or tend to negate a necessary element of one or the other offenses charged.” Id. at 542 , 482 S.E.2d at 147, 159 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“considering the existence of probable cause, the very limited intrusion undertaken incident to the stationhouse detention, and the ready destruetibility of the evidence, we cannot say that this search violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“consistent with the general recognition that superficial examination of a lawfully ar rested individual for evidence of gunpowder residue is not violative of the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
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.