State v. Cockrum’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 2005
11 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 Katz v. United States · Lewis v. United States · United States v. Lee · Bartleman v. Humphrey · State v. Hayzlett
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The courts have held there is no prejudicial error where equivalent or similar words were substituted for words in MAI as long as such deviation does not mislead the jury ... (citation omitted). The test is whether the instruction is substantially correct ... (citation omitted) and the court should consider the meaning of the instruction to a jury rather than resort to hypertechnical requirements of grammatical perfection and the use of certain words.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Coleman“to keep absolutely from the jury any reference to the constitutional right ... against self-incrimination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bulloch
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.