Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 244 N.W.2d 792 - State v. Redmon

State v. Redmon’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
2
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably State v. Jeffries (1988), Saadiq v. State (1986)

35 state decisions

20019761980199020002010decided

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 · 1 Cal. 3d 444 - People v. Hood · 3 Cal. 3d 893 - People v. Rocha · State v. Brown · People v. Rivera

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

  1. “Specific intent is present when from the circumstances the offender must have subjectively desired the prohibited result. General intent exists when from the circumstances the prohibited result may reasonably be expected to follow from the offender’s voluntary act, irrespective of any subjective desire to have accomplished such result.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The lesser offense must be composed solely of some but not all elements of the greater crime. The lesser crime must not require any additional element which is not needed to constitute the greater crime.” —State v. Stewart, supra, 223 N.W.2d at 252 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““In the court’s opinion the statutes and not the accusatory pleading or charge must establish the essential elements of the offense charged. We therefore hold the statutory or legal element test should be the sole approach in determining what are the elements of the offense charged and that the language of the information or indictment charging the crime has no bearing on that analysis.” — State v. Redmon, supra, 244 N.W.2d at 801”
    2 later decisions 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.