Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 978 P.2d 1278 - King v. State

King v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
3
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Moorman · University of Alaska v. Tumeo · 82 N.C. App. 594 - State v. Moorman · 54 Wash. App. 857 - State v. Puapuaga · 278 N.J. Super. 44 - State v. Rush

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

  1. “[did not] suggest that the legislature wished one subsection to be applied to the exclusion of the other.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Ragsdale v. State
  2. “incapable of understanding that she was engaged in sexual penetration with [the defendant].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Ragsdale v. State
  3. “incapable of appraising the nature of one's own conduct”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Ragsdale v. State

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.