Woodcox v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently September 2016
18 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 Zickefoose v. State · Spradlin v. State · Norris v. State · Smith v. State · Fointno v. State
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To convict the defendant of Attempted Dealing in Methamphetamine, a Class A felony, as alleged in Ct. VI, the State must prove each of the following elements: 1. On or about May 24, 2007, 2. The Defendant 3. With intent to manufacture methamphetamine, pure or adulterated, in an amount of three grams or more. 4. Did knowingly possess enough precursors and equipment to produce more than three grams of Methamphetamine. Which was conduct constituting a substantial step toward the commission of the crime of Dealing in Methamphetamine, a Class A Felony. If the State failed to prove each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant not guilty. If the State proved each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant guilty of Ct.VI — Attempted Dealing in Methamphetamine, a Class A Felony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Micheau v. State“Micheau did attempt to commit the crime of Dealing in Methamphetamine, a class a Felony, by knowingly possessing enough precursors and equipment to produce more than three grams of Methamphetamine, which said conduct constituted a substantial step toward the commission of the crime of Dealing in Methamphetamine, a class A Felony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Micheau v. State“as long as the instructions adequately convey the State's burden to prove intent to kill. Id. Thus, the Supreme Court held it was not fundamental error where the jury was instructed that the State must prove that the defendant was”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wilson 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.