In Re Daniecki’s Empirical Analysis
1935
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently March 2006
11 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.
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The authorities in this state are uniform that a person charged with a crime is constitutionally entitled to have his offense investigated by a grand jury, to be arraigned upon indictment found, and to a trial by jury, and that legislation erecting courts, giving them jurisdiction to try charges of crime without a jury, is beyond legislative power.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Mei“It is inconceivable that the legislature intended to make of the juvenile court a sanctuary for juvenile felons, in this instance a murderer, by subdivision `(b) who commits any act or offense for which he could be prosecuted in a method partaking of the nature of a criminal action or proceeding.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Mei“The fundamental vice in the act creating the juvenile court, with exclusive jurisdiction to try juveniles for all manner of crime, is that it denies a trial by jury and requires the culprit to be tried by the judge.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Mei
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.