Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 693 NW2D 685 - State v. Janklow

State v. Janklow’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
4
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably Behrens v. Wedmore (2005), State v. Huber (2010)

39 state decisions

140200520102020decided

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. Zeuli · State v. Burtzlaff · State v. Smith · State v. Wright · First Premier Bank v. Kolcraft Enterprises, Inc.

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

  1. “Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “When reviewing sufficiency of the evidence, this [C]ourt[] considers the evidence in a light most favorable to the verdict. A guilty verdict will not be set aside if the state’s evidence and all favorable inferences that can be drawn therefrom support a rational theory of guilt. We do not resolve conflicts in the evidence, pass on the credibility of the witnesses, determine the plausibility of an explanation, or weigh the evidence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[c]riminal responsibility for death resulting from the operation of a motor vehicle in violation of the law will result only if the violation is done is such manner as to evidence a reckless disregard for the safety of others.” The Olsen court specified that”
    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.