Rasmussen v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently November 2009 · most notably Ferguson v. State (1981), Daniels v. State (1988)
39 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 Romo v. State · State v. McHorse · 161 W. Va. 40 - State v. Ellis · Apodaca v. State · State v. Guyott
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘Delivery’ means the constructive transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship. Constructive transfer is the transfer of a controlled substance either belonging to an individual or under his direct or indirect control by some other person at the instance or direction of the individual accused of such constructive transfer.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Davila v. State · Ferguson v. State“1. A person commits murder when he intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual. 2. Our law provides that a person commits capital murder when such person intentionally or knowingly causes the death of another person while such person is in the course of committing or attempting to commit the offense of robbery. ***** . Before you would be warranted in convicting the defendant, Tammi Abbott, a/k/a Tammi Rivera Abbott, of capital murder, you must find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt not only that on the occasion in question the defendant, Tammi Abbott, a/k/a Tammi Rivera Abbott, either acting alone or as party with Federico Rivera, was engaged in the commission or attempted commission of the felony offense of robbery, if any, of Keith Nordyke and Jean Nordyke, as defined in this charge, but also that during the commission of the felony offense of robbery or attempted commission thereof, if any, the Defendant, Tammi Abbott, a/k/a Tammi Rivera Abbott, either acting alone or as a party with Federico Rivera, intentionally or knowingly strangled with a wire or stabbed with a knife Keith Nordyke and stabbed with a knife Jean Nordyke with the intention of causing the death of both. Unless you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant, Tammi Abbott, a/k/a Tammi Rivera Abbott, acting alone or as a party with Federico Rivera, on the occasion in question, specifically intended to kill the said Keith Nordyke when she strangled him with”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Daniels v. State · Abbott v. State““... We followed other jurisdictions and interpreted a constructive transfer to be the transfer of a controlled substance either belonging to the defendant or under his direct or indirect control, by some other person or manner at the instance or direction of the defendant. ...” [citing Rasmussen, supra]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Daniels v. State · Whaley 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.