Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 431 NW2D 317 - State v. Bradley

State v. Bradley’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
3
states following
September 2012
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently September 2012

4 federal appellate · 13 state decisions

1301988199020002010decided

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 United States v. Brown · State v. Christensen · State v. Ramirez · State v. Johnson · Drier v. Perfection, Inc.

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

  1. “As in Woods , the evidence does not indicate that [the witness] “knowingly,-voluntarily, and with a common intent — with the principal offender — united in the commission of the crime of premeditated murder.” No evidence suggests that he promoted, facilitated, planned or participated in premeditated murder. Nor is there evidence that he aided, abetted, or advised [the defendant] in committing premeditated murder.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) The trial court erroneously ruled as a matter of law that a State witness was not an accomplice; (2) Evidence concerning prior bad acts was inadmissible; (3) Hearsay testimony that the victim was afraid of the defendant was improperly admitted; and (4) The trial court’s refusal to admit testimony concerning a traffic count at the site where the victim was found was an abuse of discretion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Under the settled law of this state, can this Court hold that Garcia is liable to a prosecution for the identical offense charged against the defendant on trial, namely, premeditated murder? We think not.... We do not believe that Garcia knowingly, voluntarily, and with a common intent — with the principal offender — united in the commission of the crime of premeditated murder.”
    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.