State v. Tomasko’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
145 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 145 later decisions — most recently November 2013 · most notably State v. Booth (1999), State v. Pinder (1999)
145 state decisions
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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · State v. Golding · Oregon v. Mathiason · Patterson v. New York
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 145 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[o]ne who uses a deadly weapon upon a vital part of another will be deemed to have intended the probable result of that act, and from such a circumstance a proper inference may be drawn in some cases that there was an intent to kill.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Two threshold conditions must be satisfied in order to invoke the warnings constitutionally required by Miranda : (1) the defendant must have been in custody; and (2) the defendant must have been subjected to police interrogation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[W]e must defer to the [trier's] assessment of the credibility of the witnesses based on its first hand observation of their conduct, demeanor and attitude. . . .”
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.