Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 876 P.2d 682 - Mitchell v. State

Mitchell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
2
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably Nguyen v. Reynolds B (1997), Spears v. Mullin (2003)

4 federal appellate · 33 state decisions

260199320002010decided

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 Wong Sun v. United States · Alberty v. United States · Farrar v. State · Ward v. State · Cameron v. State

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

  1. “Evidence has been introduced of the defendant's departure and or concealment and or attempted to [sic] escape from custody after the alleged crime was committed. You must first determine whether this action by the defendant constituted flight. The term "flight," as it is used in this instruction, means more than departure or concealment. To be in flight, a defendant must have departed and or concealed himself and or attempted to escape from custody with a consciousness of guilt in order to avoid arrest. To find that the defendant was in flight you must find beyond a reasonable doubt that: First, the defendant departed and or concealed himself and or attempted to escape from custody, Second, with a consciousness of guilt, Third, in order to avoid arrest for the crime with which he is charged. If after a consideration of all the evidence on this issue, you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was in flight, then this flight is a circumstance which you may consider with all the other evidence in this case in determining the question of the defendant's guilt. However, if you have a reasonable doubt that defendant was in flight, then the fact of any departure and or concealment is not a circumstance for you to consider.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'This Court has long upheld the giving of flight instructions where the defendant interposed a plea of self-defense or justifiable homicide or testified at trial explaining his departure.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[e]vidence has been introduced of the defendant's departure shortly after the alleged crime was committed. You must first determine whether this action by the defendant constituted flight.”
    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.