State v. Elam’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 2012
9 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. Gullett · State v. Unverzagt · State v. Miller · State v. Nickerson · State v. Burroughs
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A person who is in an intoxicated or drugged condition whether from alcohol, drugs or other substance, is criminally responsible for conduct unless such condition is involuntarily produced and deprived him of the capacity to know or appreciate the nature, quality or wrongfulness of his conduct.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“After closing arguments the court stated that it would not have instructed a jury on the defense of mental disease or defect had the case been tried to a jury. The court observed, ‘[Tjhere was no testimony that the defendant was in a psychotic state prior to the ingestion of the drug on the day in question’ and concluded, I have come to the conclusion that the psychosis had to exist prior to the ingestion in order to qualify under the law that says if you’ve got alcohol plus a psychosis you can submit it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mouse v. State
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.