Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 238 ARIZ 322 - State v. Burke

State v. Burke’s Empirical Analysis

2015

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

7 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Coates v. City of Cincinnati · City of Chicago v. Morales · Colten v. Commonwealth of Kentucky · State v. Gendron · State v. Takacs

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

  1. “That there will be marginal cases in which it is difficult to determine the side of the line on which a particular fact situation falls is no sufficient reason to hold the language too ambiguous to define a criminal offense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “It requires only that the language of a statute convey a definite warning of the proscribed conduct.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Due process does not require, however, that a statute be drafted with absolute precision.”
    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.