State v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably State v. Roberts (2001), State v. Haddock (1995)
2 federal appellate · 38 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 Raphan v. United States · Zerman v. Melton · Bradley v. J. F. Batte & Sons of Richmond, Inc. · Murzyn v. United States · 106 Ill. 2d 186 - People v. Hoffer
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“During blood[-]splattering interpretation we look at the actual droplets of blood that have been shed on a crime scene. Blood has characteristics that abide by the law of physics when blood is shed, whether it is from a stabbing, bludgeon or gunshot wound. When a drop of blood is shed it undergoes certain patterns. If it is dropped straight up and down and lands on a surface, it will leave a perfectly round pattern. As the angle increases the blood splatter or droplets of blood as they strike something will become longer or narrower. There is a mathematical correlation between the length and the width of these blood splatters that can be measured. We can then determine what angle they came in at and by using a set of strings and thumbtacks and large protractor we are able to reconstruct the scenes of crimes many times and actually place people where they were at the time they were injured * * * or shot. ... [B]lood splatter interpretation [is] a generally accepted technique within the scientific community.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Holmes v. State · Franco v. State“unable to reconcile the jury's findings that defendant caused the death of his wife with premeditation and intent and at the same time caused that death through negligence or reckless conduct.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Stay · State v. Barsness“We can think of a few cases where such a strategy might make sense and where a defendant might agree to it. One is where the defense attorney desires to admit that defendant is guilty of one of two charges in the hope of increasing his credibility with the jury and increasing the chance that the jury will acquit defendant on the other charge. Another is where defense counsel admits that defendant is guilty of some lesser-included offense in the hope of persuading the jury to acquit defendant of the greater charged offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Prtine
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.