State v. Sanseverino’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
62 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably State v. Payne (2012), State v. Winot (2010)
62 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 United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Fay v. Noia · Darr v. Burford · Rutledge v. United States · Vidrio-Aleman v. United States
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, [we consider whether there is] reason to believe that the state opted against [charging the defendant or] seeking a jury instruction on the lesser offense ... for strategic purposes.... Second, [we consider whether there had been a change in the law after the defendant's trial and whether] the defendant has benefited from [that change without raising the issue].... Third, [we consider whether] the defendant ... has ... object[ed] to the state's request for a modification of the judgment.... Finally, [we consider whether] it would be unfair to the defendant to impose a conviction of [the lesser offense]....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Third, when [a jury instruction on the lesser offense has been given] ... it can be said with some degree of certainty that a [sentencing remand] is but effecting the will of the fact finder within the limitations imposed by law ... and ... that the appellate court is simply passing on the sufficiency of the implied verdict. When, however, no instruction at all has been offered on the lesser offense, second guessing the jury becomes far more speculative....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Petion“because [it had] not determined that, under the unique circumstances of [that case], it would be fair to the defendant to modify the judgment of conviction ... [it] must reverse the defendant's conviction of assault in the first degree ... and remand that case to the trial court with direction to render judgment of acquittal....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.