Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 761 SW2D 702 - State v. Winkelmann

State v. Winkelmann’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
3
states following
January 2007
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently January 2007

7 state decisions

30198819902000decided

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 Arizona v. Hicks · Newlon v. Missouri · State v. Newlon · State v. Harris · State v. Dunn

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

  1. “One of the issues in this case is whether the defendant was present at Blue Ridge Imports on February 8, 1988 at 1:00 p.m. On that issue, you are instructed as follows: 1. The State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was present at the time and place the vehicle is alleged to have been taken. 2. If the defendant was at Esterline Rainsoft, Inc., in Lenexa, Kansas on February 8, 1988 at 1:00 p.m., or if you do not find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was present at Blue Ridge Imports on February 8, 1988 at 1:00 p.m., then you must find the defendant not guilty.”
    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.