State v. Murchison’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably Murchison v. State (1998), State v. Ochoa (2004)
29 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 Barker v. Wingo · Sorrells v. United States · United States v. Nolasco · United States v. Parrish · United States v. Salisbury
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t is undisputed that the Bureau paid Wolff $1,200 monthly, and gave him $200 weekly for expenses. The Bureau also paid him $75 for each person he was able to buy drugs from, and an additional $200 if they eventually charged that person with the crime. In addition, the Bureau gave Wolff a motorcycle and kept it repaired, paid his auto, motorcycle, and renter’s insurance, and gave him $1,000 for a down-payment on a car.... The fact that Wolff received a fee for each person he induced to sell drugs, and an additional fee if charges were filed against that person, is not dispositive. These fees are not exorbitant, and are not contingent upon a conviction, so neither the amount nor the nature of the fees poses a risk of perjury or improper inducement by Wolff.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Wilson““In amending NDCC 12.1-05-11, the legislature replaced the wording that defined entrapment conduct as that ‘likely to cause normally law-abiding persons to commit the offense,’ with wording that defined entrapment conduct as that ‘creating] a substantial risk that such crime will be committed by a person other than one who is ready to commit it.’ This new wording appears to make more relevant an accused’s subjective predisposition to commit the crime, although the new wording does not shift the focus completely away from the law-enforcement conduct. * * * * * * “[Footnote 2 text] The legislative history of the 1993 amendment confirms an intention to make the accused’s criminal predisposition a relevant factor.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Barnes““A law enforcement agent perpetrates an entrapment if, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of a crime, the law enforcement agent induces or encourages and, as a direct result, causes another person to engage in conduct constituting such a crime by employing methods of persuasion or inducement which create a substantial risk that such crime will be committed by a person other than one who is ready to commit it. Conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Schmidt
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.