State v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently June 2020 · most notably State v. Lima (1982), 175 W. Va. 616 - State v. Miller (1985)
27 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 Davis v. Alaska · O’Callahan v. Parker, Warden · 14 Cal. 3d 864 - People v. Rincon-Pineda · State Ex Rel. Pope v. Superior Court · Byrnes v. United States
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"`Earnest resistance,' however, is a relative term and whether or not the statutory requirement was satisfied must be measured by the circumstances surrounding the alleged assault. Among the factors to be considered are the relative strength of the parties, the age of the female, her physical and mental condition, and the nature and degree of the force used by the assailant. State v. Dizon , 47 Haw. 444 , 390 P.2d 759 (1964). Resistance may appear to be useless, and may eventually prove to be unavailing, but there must have been a genuine physical effort on the part of the complainant to discourage and to prevent her assailant from accomplishing his intended purpose."”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Forcible compulsion” means physical force that overcomes earnest resistance; or a threat, express or implied, that placed a person in fear of immediate death or serious physical injury to himself .. .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In the present case, no rational connection between the complainant’s alleged past sexual experience and her capacity for truth and veracity has been established, and we therefore hold that such evidence is inadmissible on the issue of her general credibility. Such evidence could not, in the circumstances of this case, have had a possible bearing on her capacity to tell the truth. To hold otherwise would be to lend validity to the spurious assumption that a woman who has had some past sexual experience is generally less believable in eases involving sexual crimes than one who has not had that experience.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Stanley
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.