State v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1937
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently July 1997
22 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 United States Fidelity Guaranty Company v. United States · People v. Williams · United States v. St. Louis, San Francisco & Texas Railway Co. · Stripe v. United States · State v. Schweiter
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In the construction of the statutes of this state the following rules shall be observed, unless such construction would be inconsistent with the manifest intent of the legislature or repugnant to the context of the statute: “First. The repeal of a statute does not revive a statute previously repealed, nor does such repeal affect any right which accrued, any duty imposed, any penalty incurred, nor any proceeding commenced, under or by virtue of the statute repealed. . . .” (Emphasis supplied.)”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““When one is properly charged in' one or more counts of a complaint, indictment, or information with an offense, or offenses, against any of the laws of the state, and upon the trial of the action evidence is admitted of other offenses which might have been included as other counts in the complaint, indictment, or information, or on which the state might have elected to rely in the action then being tried, a conviction or acquittal on the charge, or charges, as made in the complaint, indictment, or information, shall operate as a bar to any subsequent prosecution of the same person in another action for any act or acts for which the state could have asked for a conviction under the complaint, indictment, or information in the former trial.” (G. S. 1935, 62-1449.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Momb““When a statute is repealed, and the repealing statute is silent as to whether the rights and remedies which have accrued under the repealed statute shall be abrogated or not, section 1 of the ‘Act concerning the construction of statutes’ (Gen. St. 998) will have the force and effect to have and preserve aE such rights and remedies, whether they belong to the state or to individuals, and in criminal as weE as in civil cases; and a criminal action pending under the repealed statute at the time it is repealed, may be prosecuted by virtue of said saving statute to final determination and judgment, notwithstanding said repeal. (Cited cases omitted.)” (Syl. |2.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Cramer
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.