Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 218 N.W.2d 921 - State v. Willis

State v. Willis’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
6
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably State v. Sullivan (1980), State v. Price (1976)

35 state decisions

17019741980199020002010decided

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 Grayned v. City of Rockford · Connally v. General Construction Co. · Grayned v. City of Rockford · Zwickler v. Koota · United States v. James Griggs Raines

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

  1. “[j]ury nullification exalts the goal of particularized justice above the ideal rule of law. We are persuaded the rule of law should not be subverted. A central theme in our constitutional system is that no [person] is above the law and all are equally accountable to it. The people are sovereign, but they exercise their sovereignty through government rather than juries.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““ * * * A statute is void under the Due Process Clause if it ‘either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application * * * .’ Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391 , 46 S.Ct. 126, 127 , 70 L.Ed. 322, 328 (1926). A penal statute must give a person of ordinary intelligence fair warning of what is prohibited, and, in order to avoid arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement, it must provide an explicit standard for those who apply it. Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104 , 108-109, 92 S.Ct. 2294, 2298-2299 , 33 L.Ed.2d 222, 227 (1972); State v. Robinson, 183 N.W.2d 190, 193 (Iowa 1971).””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““* * * fairly ascertainable by reference to similar statutes, prior judicial determinations, reference to the dictionary, or if the questioned words have a common and generally accepted meaning.” State v. Willis, 218 N. W. 2d 921, 923 (Iowa 1974).”
    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.