State v. McAdams’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2010
10 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 State v. Langley · Carfield v. State · State v. Dawson · Bulova Watch Co. v. Zale Jewelry Co. of Cheyenne · People v. Brown
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The right of citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the state shall not be denied.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The constitution, in declaring that, “Every citizen has the right to bear arms in defence of himself and the State,” has neither expressly or by implication, denied to the Legislature, the right to enact laws in regard to the manner in which arms shall be borne. The right guarantied to the citizen, is not to bear arms upon all occasions and in all places, but merely “in defence of himself and the State.” The terms in which this provision is phrased seem to us, necessarily to leave with the Legislature the authority to adopt such regulations of police, as may be dictated by the safety of the people and the advancement of public morals. * * * * * * A statute which, under the pretence of regulating, amounts to a destruction of the right, or which requires arms to be so borne as to render them wholly useless for the purpose of defence, would be clearly unconstitutional. But a law which is intended merely to promote personal security, and to put down lawless aggression and violence, and to that end inhibits the wearing of certain weapons ... does not come in collision with the constitution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dano v. Collins“§ 6-8-104. Wearing or carrying concealed weapons; penalties; exceptions; permits. (a) A person who wears or carries a concealed deadly weapon is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00), imprisonment in the county jail for not more than six (6) months, or both, unless; (1) The person is a peace officer; or (ii) The person possesses a permit under subsection (b) of this section. (b) A county sheriff may issue permits to travelers, merchant police, private detectives or other persons whose work, vocation or profession requires them to carry a weapon and who the sheriff believes are qualified, taking into account the person's general reputation and previous criminal record. the permits shall be issued for a three (8) year period and may be renewed for successive three (8) year periods. The sheriff may revoke a permit if the conduct of the permitee is contrary to the best interests of the state or its political subdivisions.”
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.