State v. Lindloff’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
December 1978
most recently cited
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Pietch v. United States · State v. Allnutt · Pines v. District Court · McCandless v. District Court of Polk County · State v. Long
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Section 667 of the Code of Crim.Proc. provides as follows: “When a person has been held to answer for a crime, if an indictment be not found against him, at the next term of the court at which he is held, to answer, the court may on application of the defendant order the prosecution to be dismissed, unless good cause to the contrary be shown.” (Italics mine.) The meaning of the words “held, to answer” is to be found in Section 208 of the Code of Crim.Proc. That section provides in its pertinent parts that “if . it appear from the examination that a crime has been committed and that there is sufficient cause to believe the defendant guilty thereof, the magistrate [will order] that he be held to answer the same.” (Italics mine.) Thus, it is clear that “held to answer” refers to situations where the magistrate holds a defendant either for the Court of Special Sessions or for the actions of the Grand Jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Mays
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.