State v. King’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Sheriff, Clark County v. Luqman (1985), Minnesota-Dakotas Retail Hardware Ass'n v. State (1979)
21 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Lee v. Delmont · Anderson v. Commissioner of Highways · 55 Ala. App. 502 - Cassell v. State · State v. Armington · 21 N.C. App. 474 - State v. Lisk
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In making a determination regarding a substance, the commissioner of mental health and mental retardation upon the agreement of the commissioner of public health shall consider the following: (1) The actual or relative potential for abuse; (2) The scientific evidence of its pharmacological effect, if known; (3) The state of current scientific knowledge regarding the substance; (4) The history and current pattern of abuse; (5) The scope, duration, and significance of abuse; (6) The risk to the public health; (7) The potential of the substance to produce psychic or physiological dependence liability; and (8) Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of a substance already controlled under this section.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Edwards“"(d) if any substance is designated, rescheduled, or deleted as a controlled substance under federal law and notice thereof is given to the Board, the substance shall be similarly controlled under this chapter after the expiration of thirty days from publication in the Federal Register of a final order designating a substance as a controlled substance or rescheduling or deleting a substance, unless within the thirty day period, the Board objects to inclusion, rescheduling or deletion. In that case the Board shall proceed pursuant to rule making procedures in Chapter 34.04 R C Wa.” R C Wa. 69.50.201 (d).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[a]ll members of an ordered society are presumed either to know the law or, at least, to have acquainted themselves with those laws that are likely to affect their usual activities.”
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.