Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 729 NW2D 1 - State v. Jones

State v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
3
states following
May 2021
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 2021

12 state decisions

70200720102020decided

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. § 1162 · 42 U.S.C. § 14071 (§ 170101 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994)

Relies on Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez · White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker · Moe v. Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation · Washington v. Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation · California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians

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

  1. “We acknowledge that our use in Bout-in and Kaiser of the terms “punitive”— which we used interchangeably with “criminal”—and “civil, regulatory” could cause confusion in our analysis under the Cabazon/Stone test, which distinguishes conduct that is “criminal/prohibitory” from that which is “civil/regulatory.” But “punitive” is not the same as “prohibitory,” and the definition of “regulatory” under the [Mendoza-Martinez] analysis of Boutin and Kaiser does not have the same meaning as “regulatory” employed by Pub. L. 280 and Cabazon.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “elect to delegate its functions under this part to another jurisdiction or jurisdictions within which the territory of the tribe is located and to provide access to its territory and such other cooperation and assistance as may be needed to enable such other jurisdiction or jurisdictions to carry out and enforce the requirements of this part.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “(1) the extent to which the activity directly threatens physical harm to persons or property or invades the rights of others; (2) the extent to which the law allows for exceptions and exemptions; (3) the blameworthiness of the actor; (4) the nature and severity of the potential penalties for a violation of the law.”
    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.