Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 245 Neb. 821 - State v. Jones

State v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
4
states following
December 2023
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 64 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably State v. Burlison (1998), State v. Lotter (1998)

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 64 state decisions

3801994200020102020decided

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 Victor v. Nebraska · Cage v. Louisiana · United States v. Euge · Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania v. Ben Cooper, Inc. · V-1 Oil Co. v. Gerber

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

  1. “The problem with [the acquittal first] instruction ... is not that it requires the jury to acquit the defendant on the greater charge before considering the lesser charge. An acquittal first instruction provides “for a more logical and orderly process for the guidance of the jury in its deliberations.” State v. Wussler, 139 Ariz. 428, 430 , 679 P.2d 74, 76 (1984). There are many jurisdictions that approve the propriety of instructions requiring acquittal of die most serious offense charged before consideration of lesser offenses.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “from the manslaughter instruction. CONCLUSION The judgments of conviction and the sentences are reversed, and this cause of action is remanded to the district court for a new trial. REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL. WRIGHT and CONNOLLY, JJ., not participating. GERRARD, Justice., concurring. I agree with the judgment of the majority. However, my view is that criminal homicide as the result of legally recognized provocation, i.e., upon a sudden quarrel, distinguishes the first-prong (”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “The material elements which the State must prove by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict the defendant of the crime of manslaughter are: 1. That the defendant killed Gregory A. Kowal; 2. That he did so, either: a. intentionally without malice upon a sudden quarrel, or b. unintentionally while in the commission of an unlawful act which consisted of intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causing bodily injury to Gregory A. Kowal.”
    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.