People v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably Parrish v. Lamm (1988), People v. Jefferson (1988)
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 Connally v. General Construction Co. · People v. Bridges · People v. Prante · Colorado Auto & Truck Wreckers Ass'n v. Department of Revenue · People v. Mattas
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.
““We have held that because a crime ordinarily requires the conjunction of an act and a culpable mental state, legislative silence on the element of intent in a criminal statute is not to be construed as an indication that no culpable mental state is required.... We conclude that the mental state ‘knowingly’ is implied by the counterfeit controlled substances statute and is required for a conviction of sale or distribution of counterfeit controlled substances or the possession of such substances with the intent to sell or distribute them.” (Citations omitted). 4”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“standard in Johnson , where the reasonableness language appeared as a mental state required for committing the crime. Here, the”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Ford“sufficiently general to address the essential problem under varied circumstances and during changing times.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Jefferson
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.