Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 664 SO2D 1028 - State v. Wise

State v. Wise’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
September 2016
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently September 2016

7 state decisions

50199520002010decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3237

Relies on Barrett v. United States · Julius Goldman's Egg City v. United States · Multistate Legal Studies, Inc. v. Ladd, Register of Copyrights · United States v. Wuagneux · United States v. Smith

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

  1. “Any person who writes or composes and also sends or procures the sending of any letter, inscribed communication, or electronic communication, whether such letter or communication be signed or anonymous, to any person, containing a threat to kill or to do bodily injury to the person to whom such letter or communication is sent, or a threat to kill or do bodily injury to any member of the family of the person to whom such letter or communication is sent commits a felony of the second degree.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[a] violation of this statute occurs when: (1) a person writes or composes a threat to kill or do bodily injury; (2) the person sends or procures the sending of that communication to another person; and (3) the threat is to the recipient of the communication or a member of his family.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “This is not to say that prosecution would not be appropriate in a case in which a threatening letter was mailed but not received by the intended recipient.”
    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.