Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently June 2010 · most notably Martin v. State (1986), State v. McMurtrey (1983)
2 federal appellate · 53 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 Eisenstadt v. Baker · Romano v. United States · Commonwealth v. O'SEARO · United States v. Thomas · Horton v. New York
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * Malice may be inferred from the use of a deadly weapon in a dangerous and deadly manner if the facts and circumstances so allow. Dodge v. State, Wyo.1977, 562 P.2d 303 ; State v. Bruner, 1958, 78 Wyo. 111 , 319 P.2d 863 ; Eagan v. State, 1942, 58 Wyo. 167 , 128 P.2d 215 .** *"”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Cloman v. State · Cutbirth v. State“" ‘Q In your opinion, doctor, could she have formed the necessary intent, or could she, or did she form an attempt [sic intent] to shoot and kill Dorothy Fancher at that time? "'A It is my opinion, based upon the tests, personal interviews with her, that she, the morning of what we are questioning, November 14th, had no intent to kill or harm Mrs. Fancher. “ ‘MR. TSCHIRGI: Well— " ‘THE COURT: Just a moment. He is in the middle of his offer. I don’t know if he is finished yet. “ '(By Mr. Smith) Will you explain the basis for your opinion? "'A I have used as the basis for my opinion — to go back and perceive what Mrs. Smith has told me * * "The doctor then proceeded to outline the same evidence as before the jury.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Jahnke v. State““A doctor who was not a witness to the crime and does not have first-hand knowledge of a defendant’s state of mind at the time of the offense, may not give his opinion as to what such mental state —intention—was. The state of mind of the accused is the proper subject for expert testimony when the defense is based on insanity but not when not based on such a plea.” Smith v. State, Wyo., 564 P.2d 1194, 1200 (1977).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Krucheck v. State
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.