People v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 2014
7 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 ATTORNEY GRIEV. COMM'N OF MARYLAND v. Mandel · People v. Robinson · In the Matter of Charles Lanford, Jr. · People v. Abelman · In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Mussallem
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Factors which may be considered in mitigation. Mitigating factors include: [[Image here]] (i)mental disability or chemical dependency including alcoholism or drug abuse when: (1) there is medical evidence that the respondent is affected by a chemical dependency or mental disability; (2) the chemical dependency or mental disability caused the misconduct; (3) the respondent’s recovery from the chemical dependency or mental disability is demonstrated by a meaningful and sustained period of successful rehabilitation; and (4) the recovery arrested the misconduct and recurrence of that misconduct is unlikely.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Goldstein
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.