State v. Mason’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently August 2010 · most notably State v. Zuniga (1987), State v. Parker (1999)
40 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. Covington · State v. Mason · State v. Torain · State v. Freeland · State v. Jordan
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We have consistently held that counsel must be allowed wide latitude in the argument of hotly contested cases. He may argue to the jury the facts in evidence and all reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom together with the relevant law so as to present his side of the case. Whether counsel abuses this privilege is a matter ordinarily left to the sound discretion of the trial judge, and we will not review the exercise of this discretion unless there be such gross impropriety in the argument as would be likely to influence the verdict of the jury. Even so, counsel may not employ his argument as a device to place before the jury incompetent and prejudicial matter by expressing his own knowledge, beliefs and opinions not supported by the evidence^] It is the duty of the trial judge, upon objection, to censor remarks not warranted by the evidence of the law and, in cases of gross impropriety, the court may properly intervene, ex mero motu.” (Citations omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Jones“The defendant has been accused of first degree kidnapping. Now, I charge that for you to find the defendant guilty of first degree kidnapping the State must prove five things beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that the defendant unlawfully removed a person from one place to another. Second, that the person did not consent to this removal. Third, that the defendant removed that person for the purpose of facilitating his commission of the felony of first degree sexual offense. Fourth, that this removal was a separate, complete act independent of and apart from the felony of first degree sexual offense. And, fifth, that the person had been sexually assaulted. * * * * If you do not find the defendant guilty of first degree kidnapping, you must determine whether he is guilty of second degree kidnapping. Second degree kidnapping differs from first degree kidnapping only in that it is unnecessary for the State to prove that the person had been sexually assaulted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“defendant may not be separately punished for the offenses of first degree rape and first degree kidnapping where the rape is the sexual assault used to elevate kidnapping to first degree.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Blizzard
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.