Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 256 Iowa 134 - State v. Gramenz

State v. Gramenz’s Empirical Analysis

1964

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
9
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably United States v. Brawner (1972), Johnson v. State (1982)

6 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

190196419701980199020002010decided

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 Durham v. United States · People v. Wells · Feguer v. United States · Fox v. State · State v. Wilson

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

  1. “It appears ... that testimony sufficient to establish defendant's lack of mental capacity to have malice aforethought would also be sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the right and wrong test and entitle defendant to an acquittal on a plea of insanity rather than a reduction of the sentence to manslaughter.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “While malice aforethought is the specific state of mind necessary to convict of murder, it is far different from the specific intent which is a necessary element of murder in the first degree. It may be express or implied from the acts and conduct of defendant.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““ ‘Irresistible impulse’ can be a factor under our decisions when, and only when, it so operates upon a diseased mind as to destroy the comprehension of consequences; it is not, in and of itself, a defense. The Iowa law, as it now stands, excludes it in cases where the power to distinguish between right and wrong is present, but it is claimed that the overpowering passion made it impossible for the defendant to prevent commission of the act.””
    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.