State v. White’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
32
cited by 32 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited
1 federal appellate · 31 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance v. United States · Deboue v. Louisiana · State v. Parker · State v. O'BRIEN · State v. Clay
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[P]lain errors affecting substantial rights may be considered in the discretion of the court when the court finds that manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice has resulted therefrom.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“is error that is evident, obvious and clear.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Instruction No. C A person is responsible for his own conduct and he is also responsible for the conduct of other persons in committing an offense if he acts with the other persons with the common purpose of committing that offense of if, for the purpose of committing that offense, he aids or encourages the other persons in committing it. As to Count III, if you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that between December 6, 2012 and December 8, 2012, in the County of Buchanan, State of Missouri, Kim Keith or Joshua Mollett concealed the knife used to kill Clinton Andrew Justice, and Second, that they did so with the purpose to destroy its availability in the murder investigation of Clinton Andrew Justice, and Third, that the concealment of the knife used to kill Clinton Andrew Justice impaired or obstructed the prosecution of Angela Renee Henderson a/k/a Mollett for the crime of murder in the second degree, and Fourth, that with the purpose of promoting or furthering the commission of that tampering with physical evidence, the defendant acted together with or aided Kim Keith or Joshua Mollett in committing the offense, then you will find the defendant guilty under Count III of tampering with physical evidence. However, unless you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt each and all of these propositions, you must find the defendant not guilty of that offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Henderson
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.