26 Ariz. App. 220 - State v. Dillon’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

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

1. ““is not synonymous with ‘bodily harm’ but includes any wrongful act committed by means of physical force against the person of another. The term ‘physical injury’ as used here is synonymous with ‘physical force’ and in relation to assaults the two terms are used interchangeably.” State v. Dillon, 26 Ariz.App. 220, 222 , 547 P.2d 491 ; 493 (1976); See also People v. Bradbury, 151 Cal. 675 , 91 P. 497 (1907).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Gordon · State v. Bustamonte

2. ““Cases . . . have held that intent to do physical harm is not an element of assault with a deadly weapon when a firearm is used. State v. Seebold, 111 Ariz. 423 , 531 P.2d 1130 (1975); State v. Gary, 112 Ariz. 470 , 543 P.2d 782 (1975). The criminal intent required in the crime of assault with a deadly weapon is the general intent to willfully commit an act the direct, natural and probable consequences of which, if successfully completed, would constitute a battery.” 26 Ariz. App. at 222 , 547 P.2d at 493 (Emphasis added.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Bustamonte

3. ““[A]n unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a physical injury on the person of another.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Bustamonte