Smith v. Temple’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 16 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently November 1998 · most notably Weeks Construction, Inc. v. Oglala Sioux Housing Authority (1986), State Ex Rel. Bear v. District Court of the Fifteenth Judicial District Ex Rel. County of Roosevelt (1973)
6 federal appellate · 16 district · 24 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
Applies 25 U.S.C. § 476
Relies on Williams v. Lee · Samuel Worcester v. The State of Georgia · Donnelly v. United States · Patterson v. Medberry · Williams v. United States
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.
“[T]his state has not effectively, affirmatively, and unequivocally acted to assume jurisdiction in the manner specified in [Public Law 280], therefore ... criminal jurisdiction over Indians for crimes committed within Indian territory in South Dakota is exclusively vested in the Federal and Tribal courts.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"1. The disclaimer of jurisdiction contained in our Enabling Act and Constitution deprives our state of criminal jurisdiction over Indians and Indian territory: "2. Public Law 280 (Chapter 505, 62 Stat. 588 ) is not a present grant of jurisdiction and this state has not effectively, affirmatively, and unequivocally acted to assume jurisdiction in the manner specified in such Act," (Chapter 467 of the Laws of 1963 was a statutory effort by the state to comply with Public Law 280 which was referred to and rejected by the electorate of the State of South Dakota in 1964) therefore, "3. Criminal jurisdiction over Indians for crimes committed within Indian territory in South Dakota is exclusively vested in the Federal and Tribal courts."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Molash“(Chapter 467 of the Laws of 1963 was a statutory effort by the state to comply with Public Law 280 which was referred to and rejected by the electorate of the State of South Dakota in 1964) therefore,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Molash
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.