Dawson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently January 2021 · most notably State v. Warren (2008), State v. Kittrell (1996)
28 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
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 856 (§ 416 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Perrin v. United States · McClain v. State · Austin v. State · United States v. Mei-Fen Chen · United States v. Clavis
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... which is used for keeping or distributing”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[w]hile discouraging a probationer from associating with former partners in crime is obviously related to the goal of rehabilitation, precluding association between marital partners is just as obviously an extreme restriction of liberty, even when the marital partners were once partners in crime.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Johnson v. State · State v. Warren“The state need not prove that the property was used for the exclusive purpose of keeping or distributing controlled substances, but such use must be a substantial purpose of the users of the property, and the use must be continuous to some degree; incidental use of the property for keeping or distributing drugs or a single, isolated occurrence of drug-related activity will not suffice. The purpose [for] which a person uses property and whether such use is continuous are issues of fact to be decided on the totality of the evidence of each case; the state is not required to prove more than a single specific incident involving the keeping or distribution of drugs if other evidence of continuity exists.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Westeen
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.