State v. Mees’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently November 2024
15 state decisions
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 Chapman v. State of California · Gerstein v. Pugh · Argersinger v. Hamlin · Whorley v. Commonwealth · State v. Cook
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““12.1-05-11. Entrapment. — 1. It is an affirmative defense that the defendant was entrapped into committing the offense. “2. Entrapment occurs when a law enforcement agent induces the commission of an offense, using persuasion or other means likely to cause normally law-abiding persons to commit the offense. Conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment. “3. In this section ‘law enforcement agent’ includes personnel of federal and local law enforcement agencies as well as state agencies, and any person cooperating with such an agency.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brooks · State v. Boushee
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.