Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 849 SW2D 640 - State v. Clements

State v. Clements’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
February 2014
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently February 2014 · most notably State v. Brooks (1997), State v. Howard (1995)

2 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

160199320002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Cage v. Louisiana · Andrijevic v. Kelleran · Sanders v. State · State v. Antwine

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

  1. “Q. So you were trying to get a Not Guilty by Reason of Mental Disease or Defect? A. That’s correct. Q. Were there any instructions submitted on that? A. No, because the doctors’ reports, both the State’s and mine said that he wasn’t really incompetent at the time, or incompetent at the time of trial. The strategy was with his own behaviors and the testimony of the deputies of what his behaviors had been in the jail, to put that in front of the jury and have the jury find him guilty of NGRI, which they can do, even without the request by the defense. That was the strategy. Q. So your strategy was to try to convince the jury that Mr. Honeycutt was nuts just based on them watching Paul be Paul? A. That’s correct.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Photographs are generally admissible if they are relevant to a material issue. State v. Murray, 744 S.W.2d 762, 772 (Mo. banc 1988). Photographs, although gruesome, may be admitted where they show the nature and location of wounds, where they enable the jury to better understand the testimony, and where they aid in establishing any element of the state’s case. Id.”
    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.