Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 300 N.W.2d 90 - State v. Smith

State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
August 2013
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 2013

11 state decisions

701981199020002010decided

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. Worley · State v. Hansen · State v. Burtlow · State v. Mullin · State v. Wall

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

  1. “Deception is established by the obtaining of something of value through the use of a check which the perpetrator knows is worthless. This guilty knowledge is the' mens rea of the offense. Specific intent to defraud is not an essential element.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[mjakes, utters, draws, delivers, or gives any check ... on any bank ... and obtains property or service in exchange therefor, if the person knows that such check ... will not be paid when presented.”
    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.