State v. Craig’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently February 2005 · most notably State v. Clark (1969), State v. Lucero (1975)
32 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 Morissette v. United States · Lambert v. People of the State of California · United States v. Balint · United States v. Behrman · State v. Hefflin
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ 'Generally speaking, when an act is prohibited, and made punishable by statute only, the statute is to be construed -in the light of the common law and the existence of a criminal intent is to be regarded as essential, although the terms of the statute do not require it. State v. Blacklock, 23 N.M. 251 , 167 P. 714 ; Smith v. State, 223 Ala. 346 , 136 So. 270 ; State v. Hefflin, 338 Mo. 236 , 89 S.W.2d 938 , 103 A.L.R. 1301 ; Youngs Rubber Corp. v. C. I. Lee & Co., 2 Cir., 45 F.2d 103 . But the legislature may forbid the doing of an act and make its commission criminal, without regard to the intent with which such act is done; but in such case it must clearly appear from the Act (from its language or clear inference) that such was the legislative intent. Masters v. United States, 42 App.D.C. 350 , Ann.Cas.1916A, 1243.’””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Austin · State v. Lucero““Generally speaking, when an act is prohibited and made punishable by statute only, the statute is to be construed in the light of the common law and the existence of a criminal intent is to he regarded as essential, although the terms of the statute do not require it. * * * But the legislature may forbid the doing of an act and make its commission criminal, without regard to the intent with which such act is done; hut in such case it must clearly appear from the Act (from its language or clear inference) that such was the legislative intent. “It follows that whether a criminal intent is to be regarded as essential, is a matter of construction, to be determined from a consideration of the matters prohibited, and the language of the statute, in the light of the common law rule. * * *»”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Davis
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.