Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 262 Mont. 342 - State v. Losson

State v. Losson’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Rafanelli v. Dale (1996), State v. Graves (1995)

2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

1401993200020102020decided

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 United States v. Scott · Anschuetz & Co. v. Mississippi River Bridge Authority · Wrenn v. Capstone Medical Center · United States v. Brown · Fransaw v. Lynaugh

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

  1. “[a] statement of the declarant’s then-existing state of mind, emotion, sensation, or physical condition (such as intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain and bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) the right asserted in the claim did not exist at the time of the trial and has been determined to be retroactive in its application; (b) the prosecutor, the judge, or a law enforcement agency suppressed evidence from the defendant [convicted person] or his attorney that prevented the claim from being raised and disposed of; or (c) material and controlling facts upon which the claim is predicated were not known to the defendant [convicted person] or his attorney and could not have been ascertained by the exercise of reasonable diligence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “If the evidence circumstantially proves the declarant’s state of mind, then the evidence is not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted and the evidence is not hearsay. Alternatively, when the evidence directly proves the declarant’s state of mind, the evidence is introduced to prove the truth of the matter asserted and is hearsay.”
    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.