Benedict v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently October 1984
17 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 Gernandt v. Beckwith · BURKE LUMBER & COAL COMPANY v. Anderson · Bednar v. Bednar · May v. State · Bryant v. State
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right to demand the nature and cause of the accusation. "Due process of law requires only that the accused be given sufficient notice of the nature of the charge against him in order that he may prepare a defense and plead the judgment as a bar to any subsequent prosecution for the same offense. "In this state all public offenses are statutory; no act is criminal unless the Legislature has in express terms declared it to be so; and no person can be punished for any act or omission which is not made penal by the plain import of the written law. * * * "An information must inform the accused, with reasonable certainty, of the charge being made against him in order that he may prepare his defense thereto and also be able to plead the judgment rendered thereon as a bar to a later prosecution for the same offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Buttner“`The information (or indictment) must expressly and directly state each fact that is an essential element of the crime intended to be charged so that the accused will not be required to go beyond the information to learn the nature of the charge against him or the issue he must meet. * * *.' Benedict v. State, 166 Neb. 295 , 89 N.W.2d 82, 83 . See, also, Sedlacek v. State, 147 Neb. 834 , 25 N.W.2d 533 , 169 A.L.R. 868 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Buttner
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.