Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 648 P2D 665 - People v. Wright

People v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently October 2015

6 state decisions

201982199020002010decided

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 People v. District Court for County of Jefferson · People v. Lowe · People v. Medina · 37 Colo. App. 302 - People v. Haines · 8 Md. App. 419 - Millard 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““In any trial or hearing concerning the defendant’s mental condition, physicians and other experts may testify as to their conclusions reached from their examination of hospital records, laboratory reports, X-rays, electroencephalograms, and psychological test results if the material which they examined in reaching their conclusions is produced at the time of the trial or hearing.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““[C]are should be taken not to confuse such mental disease or defect with moral obliquity, mental depravity, or a passion growing out of anger, revenge, hatred, or other motives, and kindred evil conditions, for when the act is induced by any of these causes, the person is accountable to the law.” Section 16-8-101, C.R.S. (1978 Repl.Vol. 8). Cf. § 16-8-101, C.R.S. (1983 Cum.Supp.) (applicable to offenses committed on or after July 1, 1983).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[a] person who 'is so diseased - or defective in mind at the time of the commission of the act as to be incapable of distinguishing right from wrong with respect to that act.”
    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.