State v. Mayes’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently June 2021
16 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 State v. Barker · State v. Trudo · State v. Barton · State v. Johnson · State v. Jones
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the defendant was the provocator in initiating or continuing the difficulty which resulted in the shooting; or (2) the defendant did not believe he was in imminent danger of death or injury and that use of force was not necessary to save him; or (3) he did not have reasonable grounds for such belief; or (4) the force used was unreasonable.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Elam · State v. Coffman“In order to justify the admission of physical evidence it is not required that the chain of custody be shown with perfect precision. The trial court may admit the evidence when satisfied it is: . . . reasonably probable that tampering, substitution or alteration of evidence did not occur. Absolute certainty is not required. [The] judge determines the sufficiency of physical evidence identification in light of the article’s nature, circumstances surrounding its custody and the likelihood of intermeddlers tampering with it. A more elaborate foundation is required to identify evidence that is easily substituted, such as marijuana, than is necessary to identify physical evidence with unusual characteristics, such as money, a gun, clothing and a body, or matches and glasses. Unless [the] decision to admit evidence over a chain-of-custody objection constitutes a clear abuse of discretion, it will not be overturned. [Citations omitted.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. DeSilva
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.