State v. Willis’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably State v. Foster (1992), State v. Dunagan (1989)
33 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 United States v. Russell · Sorrells v. United States · Sherman v. United States · Hampton v. United States · Public Broadcasting Service v. Network Project
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(1) A public law enforcement official or a person acting in cooperation with such an official perpetrates an entrapment if for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of an offense, he induces or encourages another person to engage in conduct constituting such offense by either: (a) making knowingly false representations designed to induce the be lief that such conduct is not prohibited; or (b) employing methods of persuasion or inducement that create a substantial risk that such an offense will be committed by persons other than those who are ready to commit it.””
9 later decisions quote this exact passage““[T]he prosecution is not required to present evidence of a defendant's predisposition to commit an offense where the only evidence of entrapment is supplied by the defendant’s uncontradicted testimony. [[Image here]] This principle also applies where the defendant’s entrapment defense is corroborated by other defense witnesses, since the jury may disbelieve any or all of his witnesses.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Schoenhals““[I]t is the defendant’s initial burden to go forward with evidence showing both unlawful governmental inducement and defendant’s lack of predisposition. The State then has the burden of proving lack of entrapment beyond a reasonable doubt. The State may do so by rebutting either defendant’s evidence of inducement or showing his predisposition.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Schoenhals
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.