State v. B. Glass’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
November 2022
most recently cited
12 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on North Carolina v. Alford · State v. Tadewaldt · State v. Gazda · State v. Cech · In re R.L.H.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the facts underlying the charged offenses, including the defendant's 'motivat[ion] by ... a common purpose or plan[.]' " State v. Strong , 2015 MT 251 , ¶ 17, 380 Mont. 471 , 356 P.3d 1078 (quoting § 46-1-202(23), MCA ). "Whether two offenses arise from the same transaction or involve the same criminal objective does not depend on the elements of the charged offenses, but rather on the defendant's underlying conduct and purpose in engaging in that conduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Ellison“a series of acts or omissions that [were] motivated by ... a purpose to accomplish a criminal objective and that [were] necessary or incidental to the accomplishment of that objective,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Ellison
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.