Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 78 N.M. 108 - State v. McAfee

State v. McAfee’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

119
cited by 119 later decisions
3
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 114 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 119 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Swafford v. State (1991), State v. Duffy (1998)

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 114 state decisions

4601967197019801990200020102020decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Escobedo v. Illinois · Johnson v. State of New Jersey · California v. Curry · Tapia v. Panhandle Steel Erectors Company

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

  1. ““ '* * * The true test of whether one criminal offense has merged in another * * * is whether one crime necessarily involves another, as, for example, rape involves fornication, and' robbery involves both assault and larceny. * * * If a defendant commits a burglary and while in the burglarized! dwelling he commits the crime of rape- or kidnapping, his crimes do not merge for neither of them is necessarily involved in the other. When one of two» criminal acts committed successively is-, not a necessary ingredient of the other,, there may be a conviction and sentence-for both. * * ””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The crime of burglary is complete when there is an unauthorized entry with the necessary intent; the intent does not have to be carried out after entry. Since stealing is a necessary element of larceny but is not a necessary element of burglary, larceny is not necessarily involved in a burglary. The elements of these two statutory crimes are not the same.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “with the intent to commit any felony or theft therein.”
    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.