Wheeler v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently October 2021 · most notably Schreibvogel v. State (2010), Dice v. State (1992)
35 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Brady v. State of Maryland · California v. Trombetta · Nye & Nissen v. United States · National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Idaho · Hopkinson 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The mere fact that a buyer of narcotics turns around and sells them to someone else, thereby bringing himself within the delivery statutes, does not make him an accomplice of the original sale made to him. There is a definite distinction between a seller and a buyer. Their separate acts may result in a single transaction, but the buyer is not aiding the ‘selling act’ of the seller and the seller is not aiding the ‘buying act’ of the buyer. The buyer and seller act from different poles. They are not in association or confederacy. An accomplice is one who participates in the same criminal conduct as the antithesis of the defendant, albeit the conduct of both is involved in a single transaction.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“[A] dispassionate review of the Intoxilyzer and the California testing procedures can only lead one to conclude that the chances are extremely low that preserved samples would have been exculpatory. ... In all but a tiny fraction of cases, preserved breath samples would simply confirm the Intoxilyzer’s determination that the defendant had a high level of blood-alcohol concentration at the time of the test. Once the Intoxilyzer indicated that respondents were legally drunk, breath samples were much more likely to provide inculpatory than exculpatory evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Humes““ * * * we said in Goodman, and have repeatedly said, that objection should be made at the time of the allegedly prejudicial comment in order that the trial court will have the opportunity to take corrective measures.” Wheeler v. State, Wyo., 691 P.2d 599, 604 (1984).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Coleman 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.