State v. Wilson’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 204 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 218 later decisions — most recently October 2024 · most notably State v. Madrigal (2000), State v. Smith (1997)
8 federal appellate · 204 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 Strickland v. Washington · Batson v. Kentucky · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · State v. Bradley · Wainwright v. Witt
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 218 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(A) a person acts purposely when it is his specific intention to cause a certain result, or, when the gist of the offense is a prohibition against conduct of a certain nature, regardless of what the offender intends to accomplish thereby, it is his specific intention to engage in conduct of that nature.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Although the Wilson court found the `gist of the offense' language confusing, it found that in the context of all the instructions given to the jury, the instructions were adequate on the element of specific intent to kill.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]here can be no such thing as an error-free, perfect trial, and * * * the Constitution does not guarantee such a trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Young
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.