State v. Kelbel’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
13 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Richardson v. United States · Hughes v. Alexandria Scrap Corp. · State v. Elmourabit · Sorenson v. St. Paul Ramsey Medical Center
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where, for example, an element of robbery is force or the threat of force, some jurors might conclude that the defendant used a knife to create the threat; others might conclude he used a gun. But that disagreement — a disagreement about means — would not matter as long as all 12 jurors unanimously concluded that the Government had proved the necessary related element, namely, that the defendant had threatened force.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Infante“[W]hen the [L]egislature's intent is clearly discernable from plain and unambiguous language[,] statutory construction is neither necessary nor permitted, and we apply the statute's plain meaning.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. LaPenotiere 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.