Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 698 P2D 1161 - State v. James

State v. James’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
12
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably State v. Salazar (1997), State v. Hummel (2017)

1 federal appellate · 47 state decisions — followed in 12 states

1601985199020002010decided

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. § 2313

Relies on Bell v. United States · Johnson v. Louisiana · Apodaca v. Oregon · United States v. Gipson · People v. . Sullivan

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

  1. “"[I]t was not necessary that all the jurors should agree in the determination that there was a deliberate and premeditated design to take the life of the deceased, or in the conclusion that the defendant was at the time engaged in the commission of a felony, or an attempt to commit one. It was sufficient that each juror was convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had committed the crime of murder in the first degree as that offense is defined by the statute.” Id. at 989-90.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) A person commits the crime of assault in the first degree if (1) with intent to cause serious physical injury to another person, he causes physical injury to any person by means of a dangerous instrument; [[Image here]] (3) he intentionally performs an act that results in serious physical injury to another person under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “By requiring semantic uniformity [in jury verdicts] we encourage overcomplicated instructions and hung juries in cases in which the jurors actually [and unanimously] agree upon the defendant's guilt.”
    3 later decisions 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.