Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 213 CONN 708 - State v. Patterson

State v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
1
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

62 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably State v. Newsome (1996), State v. Greenfield (1993)

62 state decisions

420199020002010decided

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 Franks v. Delaware · Brinegar v. United States · Gerstein v. Pugh · Frisbie v. Collins · United States v. Crews

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

  1. “[i]n order to be convicted under our murder statute, the defendant must possess the specific intent to cause the death of the victim.... To act intentionally, the defendant must have had the conscious objective to cause the death of the victim.... Intent is generally proven by circumstantial evidence because direct evidence of the accused's state of mind is rarely available.... Therefore, intent is often inferred from conduct ... and from the cumulative effect of the circumstantial evidence and the rational inferences drawn therefrom. Intent is a question of fact, the determination of which should stand unless the conclusion drawn by the trier is an unreasonable one.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “When reviewing `a motion to dismiss an information the proffered proof is to be viewed most favorably to the state.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “does not deprive the court of jurisdiction nor does it bar a subsequent prosecution or void a resulting conviction.”
    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.