State v. Porter’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
171 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 173 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably State v. Stager (1991), State v. Barnes (1997)
171 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Faretta v. California · Bruton v. United States · Ohio v. Roberts · Rhode Island v. Innis
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 173 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]f the State has offered substantial evidence against defendant of every essential element of the crime charged[,]”
9 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. In Re JH · State v. Washington““Whether an instrument is a dangerous weapon or a firearm can only be judged by the victim of a robbery from its appearance and the manner of its use. We cannot perceive how the victims in [the] instant case could have determined with certainty that the firearm was real unless defendant had actually fired a shot. We would not intimate, however, that a robbery victim should force the issue merely to determine the true character of the weapon. Thus, when a witness testified that he was robbed by use of a firearm or other dangerous weapon, his admission on cross-examination that he could not positively say it was a gun or dangerous weapon is without probative value. We conclude that when the State offers evidence in an armed robbery case that the robbery was attempted or accomplished by the use or threatened use of what appeared to the victim to be a firearm or other dangerous weapon, evidence elicited on cross-examination that the witness or witnesses could not positively testify that the instrument used was in fact a firearm or dangerous weapon is not of sufficient probative value to warrant submission of the lesser included offense of common law robbery. When a person perpetrates a robbery by brandishing an instrument which appears to be a firearm, or other dangerous weapon, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the law will presume the instrument to be what his conduct represents it to be —a firearm or other dangerous weapon.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(a) the unlawful taking or attempted taking of personal property from another person or in his presence; (b) by use or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, implement or means; (c) whereby the life of a person is endangered.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Murray · State v. Rasor
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.