State v. Berry’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
79 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably State v. Harris (1981), State v. Williams (1983)
79 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 Terry v. Ohio · Brady v. State of Maryland · Beck v. State of Ohio · Adams v. Williams · California v. Green
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1. The court shall not impose an extended term under section 558.016 unless (1) The indictment or information . . . pleads all essential facts warranting imposition of an extended term; and (2) After a finding of guilty ... a sentencing hearing is held at which evidence establishing the basis for an extended term is presented in open court with full rights of confrontation and cross-examination, and with the defendant having the opportunity to present evidence; and (3)The court determines the existence of the basis for the extended term and makes specific findings to that effect. [emphasis added]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Admission of evidence complained of as prejudicial or inflammatory rests within the sound discretion of the trial judge. The standard of relevance is the main criterion. State v. Thresher, 350 S.W.2d 1, 6-7 (Mo.1961); State v. McCabe, 512 S.W.2d 442, 444 (Mo.App.1974). Relevancy is found if the evidence logically tends to support or establish a fact in issue. State v. Moore, 435 S.W.2d 8, 11 (Mo. banc 1968). Because defendant pled not guilty, he put “in issue all facts constituting the corpus delicti as well as the defendant’s criminal agency.” Id. at 11-12 . Henqe, to establish guilt, all evidence related to any element of the crime of forcible rape became relevant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Moore“The Court does find that the defendant is one who has been previously convicted of two felonies at different times, and not related to the instant crime. The Court further finds that defendant is being sentenced for a felony, during the commission of which he knowingly endangered or threatened the life of another person, or knowingly threatened to inflict serious physical injury on another person. The Court, therefore finds that defendant is both a persistent offender and a dangerous offender.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Thompson
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.