Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 Ariz. 200 - State v. Schantz

State v. Schantz’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

200
cited by 200 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 4 district · 184 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 200 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2023 · most notably State v. Gretzler (1983), Clark v. Arizona (2006)

10 federal appellate · 4 district · 184 state decisions

8701965197019801990200020102020decided

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 Lehigh Valley Cooperative Farmers, Inc. v. United States · People v. Wells · Massengale v. United States · People v. Gorshen · State v. Lucas

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

  1. ““This test of legal insanity has two elements. An accused must have had at the time of the commission of the criminal act: “(1) Such a defect of reason as not to know the nature and quality of the act, or “(2) If he did know, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong.””
    18 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““There is an inference arising out of the failure of the State to call expert medical witnesses in rebuttal that the defendant’s evidence as to insanity is true because uncontradicted * * State v. Schantz, supra, 98 Ariz. at 213, 214 , 403 P.2d at 530 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"Whatever may be the theoretical merits in the medical evaluation of the volitional aspects of the human mind, we, * * *, do not accept § 4.01 of the Model Penal Code as the test for criminal responsibility in this state."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.