McNeilly v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1937
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently June 1969
14 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 Nash v. United States · United States v. L. Cohen Grocery Co. · Mobile Jackson Kansas City Railroad Company v. J a Turnipseed · Albert Adams v. People of the State of New York · McFarland v. American Sugar Refining Co.
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While the language of the act is broad, we do not share the opinion that it is either indefinite, uncertain or vague. On the contrary, we think the language of the act evinces a clear, definite and ascertainable standard of guilt * * *.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“sets forth an additional fact which must be proved, namely, that the accused `be present in the state for an unlawful purpose.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“is in this State for an unlawful purpose.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.