Hutchins v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1898
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently November 1986 · most notably Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co v. Collins (1907), Treschman v. Treschman (1901)
3 federal appellate · 26 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 Shields v. State · Stanley v. Sutherland · Newport v. State · People v. Williams · Hamm v. Romine
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“And as such statement, verified or unverified, could not be received from the juror to impeach the verdict or the conduct of the jury in making it, such statement cannot be received from one deriving his knowledge from a juror (at second hand); otherwise, the inhibition of the law against jurors impeaching their verdict is frittered away and destroyed. ... That would be authorizing something to be done indirectly that the law forbids to be done directly.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wagner v. Riley“The affiant does not state how he obtained the information of the alleged misconduct of the jury. ... If it came to him from some of the jurymen, it could not be received, for it has long been settled in this state that the affidavits of jurors cannot be received to impeach their verdict; much less could their statements be received at second hand.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wagner v. Riley
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.