Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 141 KAN 12 - State v. Finney

State v. Finney’s Empirical Analysis

1935

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
6
states following
October 1993
most recently cited

37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently October 1993 · most notably 57 Cal. 2d 657 - Keene v. Keene (1962), State v. Ashton (1953)

37 state decisions

1201935194019501960197019801990decided

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 State v. Keehn · National Surety Co. v. Williams · Ayers v. . Lawrence · State v. Pratt · State v. Jones

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

  1. ““On an appeal, the court must give judgment without regard to technical errors or defects, or to exceptions which do not affect the substantial rights of the parties.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““If the facts which will convict upon the second prosecution would not necessarily have convicted on the first, then the first will not be a bar to the second, although the offense charged may have been committed under the same state of facts. (8 R. C. L. 143, 144.) A putting in jeopardy for one act is not a bar to a prosecution for a separate and distinct act, merely because they are so closely connected in point of time that it is impossible to separate the evidence relating to them on the trial for the one of them first had. Consequently a plea of former jeopardy will not be sustained where it appears that in one transaction, two distinct crimes were committed. (8 R. C. L. 151.)” (p. 401.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““No indictment or information may be quashed or set aside for any of the following defects: “Sixth. For any surplusage or repugnant allegation, when there is sufficient matter alleged to indicate the crime and person charged. Nor, “Seventh. For any other defect or imperfection which does not tend to the prejudice of the substantial rights of the defendant upon the merits.””
    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.