State v. Wyant’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2020
22 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 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire · West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Motive, in criminal law, is not an element of the crime.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“`Intent' refers to the actor's state of mind or volition at the time he acts. Did A intend to kill B when A's car hit B's, or was it an accident? This is not the same as A's motive, which is why A intentionally killed B. When A murders B in order to obtain B's money, A's intent is to kill and the motive is to get money. One can have motive without intent, or intent without motive. For instance, the wife of a wealthy but disabled man might have a motive to kill him, and yet never intend to do so. A psychopath, on the other hand, may intend to kill and yet have no motive.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Id. at , 112 S. Ct. at 2543 , 120 L. Ed. 2d at 318 . The government may not regulate even fighting words based on a hostility toward the message they contain. Any proscription of fighting words must not be based on content. The court observed that the St. Paul ordinance went beyond content discrimination to viewpoint discrimination. Quite recently the Supreme Court of Wisconsin struck down the Wisconsin”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Columbus v. Fabich
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.