Drye v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently December 2008 · most notably Owens v. Guida (2008), State v. Bullington (1976)
2 federal appellate · 24 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 City of San Antonio v. Hamilton · 8 Smith & H. 23 - Davis v. State · McElroy v. State · Toler v. State · Winton 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[I]f there was provocation of a sufficient character, and the killing was under passion thus excited, it would be manslaughter. But it is not every provocation that will reduce the killing to manslaughter, not even blows under all circumstances, for the resentment must bear a reasonable proportion to the provocation. Nevertheless, although there be no sufficient provocation to reduce the killing to manslaughter, still there may be such provocation as to excite passion in fact, and if the purpose to kill is formed in passion thus excited, and executed without time for the passion to cool, it is not murder in the first degree, but murder in the second degree.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cooper v. State““Both of these opinions emphasize, that if the killing is done in passion, the offense is not murder in the first degree; if in passion adequately provoked and acted on before the passion has cooled, it is voluntary manslaughter; and, if in passion in fact, although the provocation be insufficient to reduce the offense to manslaughter, it will nevertheless be murder in the second degree only.” 181 Tenn. at 644 , 184 S.W.2d at 13 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Thornton“[wjhile conceding ... but not deciding, that reason had not been so far dethroned as to render the killing excusable, we think it clear that the defendant did not act with that coolly formed premeditated deliberation which is an essential characteristic of murder in the first degree.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Phipps
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.