Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 464 Md. 133 - State v. Thomas

State v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

2019

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 812 (§ 202 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · State v. Albrecht · Faya v. Almaraz · 134 S. Ct. 881 - Burrage v. United States · 134 S. Ct. 1710 - Paroline 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Ingesting heroin is a foreseeable result of its supply, and death a foreseeable consequence of 19 its ingestion.”
    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.