Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 5 district · 60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently December 1992 · most notably Dow v. State (1971), Dwyer v. State (1956)
3 federal appellate · 5 district · 60 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 State v. Doran · Rell v. State · State v. Beckwith · State v. Lynch · State v. J. P. Bass Publishing 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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““----Indeed it is an elementary rule of criminal pleading that every fact or circumstance which is a necessary ingredient in a prima facie case of guilt must be set out in the indictment.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Flemming · Duncan v. State““Whoever, being lawfully detained for any criminal offense, in any jail or other place of confinement . . . shall be punished . . . .” P.L. 1915, c. 136.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Flemming · State v. Garcia“"While in a colloquial sense it may be said that one who is arrested on a charge of crime is arrested for a criminal offense and that one who is detained in jail to await trial for criminal offense with which he is charged, or to answer to an indictment for a criminal offense if the same may be returned against him, is detained for a criminal office, [sic] he is not in fact detained in jail for the criminal offense nor is he in fact in custody for the crime. In view of the fact that this statute categorically provides that the sentence for its violation shall commence `after the completion of any sentence imposed for the crime for which he was then in custody', and in view of the fact that the statute provides for a maximum penalty of imprisonment for a term of seven years, thus changing a common law crime from a misdemeanor to a felony, we believe that the purpose of the act was to provide for the punishment of those who, having been convicted of crime, escape from jail or other place of detention, except the State Prison, either before or after sentence. Had the legislature intended to include within the terms of the statute those charged with the commission of crime, or those committed in default of bail to await action by the grand jury, it could easily have employed apt language therefor." (Emphasis added)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Flemming · State v. Garcia
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.