Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 845 P.2d 402 - Doud v. State

Doud v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
March 2024
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 2024

6 state decisions

301993200020102020decided

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 Lessard v. State · Jennings v. State · Loomer v. State · Munson v. State · 155 Cal. App. 2d 486 - People v. Witzel

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

  1. “§ 6-2-5022. Aggravated assault and battery; penalty. (a) A person is guilty of aggravated assault and battery if he: (i) Causes serious bodily injury to another intentionally, knowingly or recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life; (if) Attempts to cause, or intentionally or knowingly causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon; (iii) Threatens to use a drawn deadly weapon on another unless reasonably necessary in defense of his person, property or abode or to prevent serious bodily injury to another; or (iv) Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causes bodily injury to a woman whom he knows is pregnant. (b) Aggravated assault and battery is a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than ten (10) years.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In a case in which there are multiple counts, each one is treated as if it were a separate indictment. The verdict on the various counts need not be consistent. An acquittal on one count does not prevent conviction on another, even though the evidence is the same and defendant could not have committed one crime without committing both, so long as the evidence is sufficient to support conviction on the count on which a guilty verdict was reached.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““ ‘[T]his court must determine whether, after viewing the evidence and appropriate inferences in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime to have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.’ ” Jennings v. State, 806 P.2d 1299, 1302 (Wyo.1991) (quoting Munson v. State, 770 P.2d 1093, 1095 (Wyo.1989)).”
    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.