Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 598 S.W.2d 118 - State v. Smith

State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
May 1993
most recently cited

12 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Lego v. Twomey · Rodriquez v. United States · State v. Yowell · State v. Stapleton · State v. Olds

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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It is generally agreed . . . that drug influence or intoxication at the time of making a statement or confession does not require exclusion because not voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently made unless the intoxication or drug influence amounts to mania. The fact of drug influence and intoxication, absent mania, only goes to the credibility and weight of the statement. Before exclusion is required, it should appear that defendant was so intoxicated or influenced that he was unable to appreciate the consequences and nature of his statements.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[u]nder the specific language of the instructions the jury was given the option to exercise leniency by convicting appellant of murder in the second degree, but it declined to do so. There is no reason to assume that if a manslaughter instruction had been given the jury would have availed itself of the manslaughter option, which would have called for even greater leniency.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.