Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 170 W. Va. 259 - State v. Less

170 W. Va. 259 - State v. Less’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
3
states following
February 2022
most recently cited

49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably 200 W. Va. 280 - State v. Hinkle (1996), 171 W. Va. 568 - State v. Audia (1983)

49 state decisions

17019821990200020102020decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 371

Relies on In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Pinkerton v. United States · American Tobacco Co. v. United States · Yates v. United States · United States v. Feola

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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he agreement to commit an offense is the essential element of the crime of conis the conduct prohibited by the statute. The agreement may be inferred from the words and actions of the conspirators, or other circumstantial evidence, and the State is not required to show the formalities of an agreement.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[i]t shall be unlawful for two or more persons to conspire ... to commit any offense against the State ... if ... one or more of such persons does any act to effect the object of the conspiracy.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““In a criminal case, a verdict of guilt will not be set aside on the ground that it is contrary to the evidence, where the state’s evidence is sufficient to convince impartial minds of the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence is to be viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution. To warrant interference with a verdict of guilt on the ground of insufficiency of evidence, the court must be convinced that the evidence was manifestly inadequate and that consequent injustice has been done.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.