People v. . Sharp’s Empirical Analysis
1887
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 9 district · 156 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 203 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1983 · most notably Counselman v. Hitchcock (1892), Brown v. Walker (1896)
20 federal appellate · 9 district · 156 state decisions — followed in 29 states
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 Kilbourn v. Thompson · State v. Lapage · People, Ex Rel. McDonald v. . Keeler · Pierson v. . the People · People Ex Rel. Hackley v. Kelly
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 203 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In the eyes of the law, all are innocent until convicted in accordance with •the forms of law, and by a close adherence to its rules.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A person offending against any provision of any foregoing section of this code relating to bribery, is a competent witness against another person so offending, and may be compelled to attend and testify upon any trial, hearing, proceeding or investigation, in the same manner as any other person. But the testimony so given shall not be used in any prosecution or proceeding,' civil or criminal, against the person so testifying. A person so testifying to the giving of a bribe which has been accepted, shall not thereafter be liable to indictment, prosecution, or punishment for that bribery, and may plead or prove the giving of testimony accordingly, in bar of such an indictment or prosecution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““It is, indeed, elementary law that no evidence can be admitted which does not tend to prove the issue joined, and the reason and necessity of the rule are much stronger in criminal than in civil cases for the observance of this rule, and of confining the evidence strictly to the issue. The indictment is all that the defendant is expected to come prepared to answer. Therefore the introduction of evidence of another and extraneous crime is calculated to take the defendant by surprise, and to do him manifest injustice by creating a prejudice against his general character.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Hurlburt
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.