Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 331 N.W.2d 48 - State v. Morris

State v. Morris’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
5
states following
November 2025
most recently cited

1 district · 44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently November 2025 · most notably State v. Woinarowicz (2006), State v. Dvorak (2000)

1 district · 44 state decisions

12019831990200020102020decided

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 Griffin v. United States · Skibs v. Otis McAlLister & Co. · United States v. Pope · State v. Faulkner · 337 So. 2d 1177 - State v. Marks

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

  1. “power and capability to exercise dominion and control over the contraband.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “"The State presented evidence which established (1) Morris was present in an area where marijuana was found, (2) Morris was in close proximity to the marijuana found, and (3) this marijuana was observed in plain view by the officer looking through the front passenger's side of the van. We believe from these particular facts that a jury could reasonably infer beyond a reasonable doubt that Morris had the ability to control the area where, and the package in which, the marijuana was found, and that he therefore was in constructive possession of the marijuana. The evidence, although circumstantial, was sufficient to support the jury's verdict."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. ““Except as authorized by this chapter, it is unlawful for any person to manufacture, deliver, or possess with intent to manufacture or deliver, a controlled substance ....” 3”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.