Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 460 A2D 1017 - State v. White

State v. White’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
states following
January 2025
most recently cited

1 district · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 2025

1 district · 19 state decisions

8019831990200020102020decided

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 Rhode Island v. Innis · Massiah v. United States · Brewer v. Williams · United States v. Harriss · Michel v. United States

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

  1. “On or about the 10th day of December, 1983, in the County of Somerset, State of Maine, EDWARD B. MICHAUD, did engage in conduct which manifested a depraved indifference to the value of human life in that (a) a reasonable and prudent person in MICHAUD’s situation would have known that there was a very high degree of risk that MICHAUD’s conduct would cause serious bodily injury; and (b) MICHAUD’s conduct, when viewed in light of the totality of the circumstances, reflected such an indifference to the value of human life that it would be generally regarded by a reasonable and prudent person as depraved, and, such conduct in fact caused the death of Garrett Brann, all in violation of 17-A M.R.S.A. § 201(1)(B) and (1-A) (1983 & Supp.1983). An indictment is sufficient if it contains such plain, concise, and definite allegations of the essential facts constituting the offense as shall adequately apprise a defendant of reasonable and normal intelligence of the act charged, enabling him to defend himself, and, upon conviction or acquittal, to make use of the judgment as the basis for a plea of former jeopardy, should the occasion arise.”
    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.