State v. Dokken’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently February 2009 · most notably State v. Moeller (1996), State v. Michalek (1987)
41 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2111
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · 88 Wash. 2d 221 - State v. Wanrow · 101 Wash. 2d 591 - State v. Allery · Granito v. United States · State v. Reddington
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.
“Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Roden v. Solem · State v. Champagne“The kind and degree of force which a person may lawfully use in self-defense are limited by what a reasonable person in the same situation as such person, seeing what he sees and knowing what he knows, then would believe to be necessary. Any use of force beyond that is regarded by the law as excessive. Although a person may believe that he is acting, and may act, in self-defense, he is not justified in using a degree of force clearly in excess of that apparently and reasonably necessary under the existing facts and circumstances. It is the function of the jury to determine whether or not the shooting of Jeff Kratz by George Luckie constitutes self-defense. His claim of self-defense is to be evaluated in light of all circumstances known to him at the time of the shooting. If you find that George Luckie was acting in self-defense, then you must find him not guilty of aggravated assault.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Luckie“[t]he term "modus operandi" is included with the "plan" exception in SDCL 19-12-5. Thus, we stated that the plan exception requires that the former acts should indicate, by common features, a plan or design which tends to show that it was carried out by doing the act charged.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Moeller
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.