Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 481 NW2D 259 - State v. Wall

State v. Wall’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
3
states following
April 2021
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably State v. Knecht (1997), State v. Hoadley (2002)

27 state decisions

2001992200020102020decided

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. Pino · State v. O'CONNOR · State v. Michalek · State v. Heumiller · State v. Big Head

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

  1. “(1) ... the elements of the included offense are [the same or] [8] lesser in number than the elements of the greater offense; (2) the penalty for the lesser-included offense must be less than that of the greater offense; and (3) both offenses must contain common elements so that the greater offense cannot be committed without also committing the lesser offense.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In determining the sufficiency of the evidence on review, the question presented is whether there is evidence in the record which, if believed by the fact finder, is sufficient to sustain a finding of guilt be yond a reasonable doubt. State v. Lewandowski, 463 N.W.2d 341, 343-44 (S.D.1990). In this review, we must accept that evidence, and the most favorable inferences to be fairly drawn therefrom, which will support the verdict. Id. at 344 (citations omitted). In determining the sufficiency of the evidence, this Court -will not “ ‘resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of witnesses, or weigh the evidence.’ ” State v. Hanson, 456 N.W.2d 135, 139 (S.D.1990)(quoting State v. Faehnrich, 359 N.W.2d 895, 900 (S.D.1984)). No guilty verdict will be set aside if the evidence, including circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, sustains a reasonable theory of guilt. State v. Bartlett, 411 N.W.2d 411, 412 (S.D.1987).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “failure to specifically object to evidence at trial forecloses complaint of the issue on appeal”
    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.