Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 838 P.2d 648 - State v. Mincy

State v. Mincy’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
April 2014
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently April 2014

9 state decisions

70199220002010decided

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 · Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers · Stovall v. Denno · Manson v. Brathwaite

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.

  1. “"(1) [T]he opportunity of the witness to view the actor during the event; (2) the witness's degree of attention to the actor at the time of the event; (3) the witness's capacity to observe the event, including his or her physical and mental acuity; (4) whether the witness's identification was made spontaneously and remained consistent thereafter, or whether it was the product of suggestion; and (5) the nature of the event being observed and the likelihood that the witness would perceive, remember and relate it correctly."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The court shall not be obligated to charge the jury with respect to an included offense unless there is a rational basis for a verdict acquitting the defendant of the offense charged and convicting him of the included offense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[W]hen assessing a trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress, we `will not disturb the factual findings underlying the ruling unless they are clearly erroneous.'”
    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.