State v. Pickens’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably 193 Ill. 2d 413 - People v. Malchow (2000), 21 Cal. 4th 785 - People v. Castellanos (1999)
4 federal appellate · 32 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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 Weaver v. Graham · Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez · Department of Revenue of Mont. v. Kurth Ranch · Lambert v. People of the State of California · De Veau v. Braisted
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a.] Whether the sanction involves an affirmative disability or restrain^;] [b.] Whether it has historically been regarded as a punishment[;] [c,] Whether it comes into play only on a finding of scienter[;] [d.] Whether its operation will promote the traditional aims of punishment — retribution and deter- rence[;] [e.] Whether the behavior to which it applies is already a crime[;] [f.] Whether an alternative purpose to which it may rationally be connected is assignable for it[;] and [g.] Whether it appears excessive in relation to the alternative purpose assigned[J”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“`does not place new information into the public domain.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he mark of an ex post facto law is the imposition of what can fairly be designated punishment for past acts. The question in each case where unpleasant consequences are brought to bear upon an individual for prior conduct, is whether the legislative aim was to punish that individual for past activity, or whether the restriction of the individual comes about as a relevant incident to a regulation of a present situation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Swartz
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.