Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 383 NW2D 656 - State v. Race

State v. Race’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
2
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably State v. Bias (1988), State v. Rhodes (2003)

2 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

2401986199020002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · State v. Caron · State v. Merrill · State v. Wahlberg · State v. Norgaard

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

  1. “`whether, under the facts in the record and any legitimate inferences that can be drawn from them, a jury could reasonably conclude that the defendant was guilty of the offense charged.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “must conclude that the jury, acting with due regard for the presumption of innocence and the necessity of overcoming it by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, could reasonably have found the defendant was proven guilty of the offense charged.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “On May 12 and immediately thereafter, a comprehensive effort was made to locate the alleged second raft. Notwithstanding extensive radio, television and newspaper media attention given to the search for the “other” blue and yellow rubber raft, no one reported sighting or finding such a raft. Trial evidence established that a raft similar to that found on the boat, with pockets of air in it, would be virtually unsinkable. Because of the intensity of the search for the raft, one of the search officers went so far as to testify at trial that had any “other” raft existed, it would have been found. Many witnesses who testified at trial, who were on or near Lake Superior on May 11-12, 1982, and who have been on or near the lake since, indicated they had neither seen, found nor heard of anyone else who had seen or found any other blue and yellow rubber raft.”
    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.