Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 639 NE2D 677 - Correll v. State

Correll v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
December 2007
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · United States v. Dunnigan · United States v. Curry · Wilson v. United States · Bellmore v. State

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

  1. “to convict the defendant ... the State must have proved each of the following elements: the defendant 1. knowingly or intentionally 2. removed another person, by fraud, enticement, force or threat of force, from one place to another with intent to obtain the release, or intent to aid in the escape of any person from lawful detention.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Correll's attorneys should have been aware of the discrepancy in the specified elements as compared to the factual allegations in the information.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “In order to con-viet Correll of class B felony confinement, the state was required to allege Correll was armed with a deadly weapon.”
    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.