Moon v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
4
states following
October 1998
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 375 · 18 U.S.C. § 1385
Relies on Harker v. State · Jackson v. State · Municipality of Anchorage v. King
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) If there are reasonable grounds to believe that [a person not subject to the U.C.M.J.] has committed a drug offense in conjunction with a member of the Armed Forces and the investigative actions are undertaken to obtain evidence concerning all illegal drug transactions between such person and any member of the Armed Farces, or (2) If there are reasonable grounds to believe that such person is the immediate source of the introduction of illegal drugs onto the military installation and the investigative actions are undertaken to obtain evidence concerning all persons engaged in drug trafficking on the installation.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Fox v. State · People v. Tyler“Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Fox v. State · McNeil v. State“Actions that are taken for the primary purpose of furthering a military or foreign affairs function of the United States, regardless of incidental benefits to civilian authorities. This provision must be used with caution, and does not include actions taken for the primary purpose of aiding civilian law enforcement officials or otherwise serving as a subterfuge to avoid the restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act. Actions under this provision may include the following, depending on the nature of the [Department of Defense] interest and the specific action in question: (A) Actions related to enforcement of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C. Chapter 47). [[Image here]] (F) Such other actions that are undertaken primarily for a military or foreign affairs purpose.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Tyler
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.