Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 87 N.W.2d 736 - State v. Ramstad

State v. Ramstad’s Empirical Analysis

1958

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
June 1974
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 122 Cal. App. 2d 281 - People v. Gorgol · 42 Wash. 2d 590 - Cantrill v. American Mail Line, Ltd. · 138 Cal. App. 2d 35 - People v. Terrell · State v. Hampton · People v. Fowzer

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

  1. ““1. In passing on a motion for a new trial based on the insufficiency of the evidence in a criminal case the trial court is clothed with a wide discretion and his determination will not be disturbed unless there appears to have been an abuse of that discretion. “2. It is not an abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court to deny a motion for new trial on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence where there is substantial evidence to support the verdict.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““* * * permits a wide discretion on the part of the trial court in passing upon the sufficiency of the foundation of proffered evidence that otherwise comes within the purview of the statute and the ruling of the trial court in this respect will not be disturbed by the appellate court except for a manifest abuse of that discretion.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.