State v. Ortiz’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently July 2012 · most notably State v. Clark (1969), Bokum Resources Corp. v. New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission (1979)
46 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. Nance · Martinez v. Research Park, Inc. · State v. Thompson · State v. Couch · Hendricks v. Hendricks
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"`Whoever, not being a manufacturer or wholesaler licensed pursuant to section 54-7-4 New Mexico Statutes Annotated, 1953 Compilation, physician, veterinarian, dentist, nurse acting under the direction of a physician, or an employee of a hospital or laboratory acting under the direction of its superintendent or official in immediate charge, or a common carrier or messenger when transporting any drug mentioned herein between parties hereinbefore mentioned in the same package in which the drug was delivered to him for transportation, is found in possession thereof, except by reason of an order or prescription lawfully and properly issued shall be punished as hereinafter provided.'"”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Garcia““Penal statutes are of course to be strictly construed, but they are not to be subjected to any strained or unnatural construction in order to work exemptions from their penalties. ****** “But the rule does not exclude the application of common sense to the terms made use of in an act, in order to avoid an absurdity which the Legislature ought not to be presumed to have intended.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Gillihan““54 — 7-2. Definitions. — As used in the Uniform Narcotic Drug Act [54-7-1 to 54-7-49]: ****** “F. ‘Manufacturer’ means a person who by compounding, mixing, cultivating, growing or other process, produces or prepares narcotic drugs, but does not include an apothecary who compounds narcotic drugs to be sold or dispensed on prescription”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Gonzales
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.