Addis v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably Gray v. Raines (1981), Griffin v. State (1982)
4 federal appellate · 21 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 Thompson v. City of Louisville · De Jonge v. Oregon · Cole v. State of Arkansas · Wilson v. State · Young v. State
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"A person who knowingly or intentionally: (1) confines another person without his consent; or (2) removes another person, by fraud, enticement, force, or threat of force, from one place to another; commits criminal confinement, a Class D felony. However, the offense is a Class C felony if the other person is under {fourteen (14) years of age and is not his child, and a Class B felony if it is committed while armed with a deadly weapon or results in serious bodily injury to another person."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Schick v. State · Kelly v. State“(N)otice of the specific charge, and a chance to be heard in a trial of the issues raised by that charge”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Gray v. Raines · Griffin v. State““Under section one of the statute, the act of nonconsensual confinement is prohibited, irrespective of any intent to remove the individual to another location; thus, the elements of the first type of confinement would be: (1) knowingly or intentionally, (2) confining another person, (3) without their consent. But lack of consent is not an element of confinement under section two. Instead, it would be necessary to show the accused: (1) knowingly or intentionally, (2) removed another person from one place to another, (3) by fraud, or enticement, force or threat of force.””
2 later decisions 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.