Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 154 Miss. 451 - Ousley v. State

Ousley v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1929

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 898 So. 2d 641 - Price v. State (2005), 977 So. 2d 329 - Boyd v. State (2008)

28 state decisions

1001929193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Potter v. United States · State v. Schaefer · State v. . Massey · Kline v. State · Galvin v. Gualala Mill 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It is not essential, in an indictment for a statutory crime, that the exact descriptive language of the statute be used. Equivalent words of substantially the same meaning as those of the statute may be substituted. Where the language used in the indictment is sufficiently specific to give notice of the act made unlawful, and exclusive enough to prevent its application to other acts, it is sufficient.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a] willful act is one that is done knowingly and purposely with the direct object in view of injuring another.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a still for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor,”
    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.