Ryder v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1897
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1984 · most notably Press-Enterprise Company v. Superior Court of California Riverside County (1984), Scanlon v. Kansas City (1930)
1 federal appellate · 30 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
Relies on Carr 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There seems to have been no violation of this well-settled rule in ^ regard to the non-expert witnesses m this case. Each witness^ examined was allowed^ to state his opinion, and no one did so without giving his reasons therefor. The opmion and the reasons go to the jury together, that the jury may determine what the opinion is worth. It may be that i. , ♦ r ♦ a particular reason given for an opm- * • n j , i ion is not really a good one, and such a ,, L 1 1.1 • ,1 . j reason would most probably, m the mmd , . . i,. . . r . of an intelligent juror, destroy the opm- & 1 J 1 . ion at once: but, nevertheless, the opmj i, , ** ion and the reason ought to be consid- & . . ered, that the jury may give the opinion i! • t.4. it, 4.1-1 a such weight as they think proper. & r”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““W. L. Ryder was indicted for the offense of murder, His defense was that he did not commit the homicide charged in the indictment, and that if he did, he was insane at the time the killing was done. ... In a case like the present, where there has been a shocking homicide, and where there can be scarcely a doubt that the accused' committed it, although he does not expressly so admit in his plea, the defense mainly relied on being that of insanity at the time of the killing, it was depriving the accused of a very great‘right when he was forced to trial in the absence of these four witnesses, who knew the facts that were material to his defense, and whose presence was important to the proper determination of the issue.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Musselman
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.