Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 194 KY 699 - Spencer v. Commonwealth

Spencer v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1922

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
December 2008
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently December 2008

19 state decisions

50192219301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Commonwealth v. Matthews · Jackson v. Commonwealth · Commonwealth v. Jones · Coleman v. State · State v. Jones

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

  1. ““If the jurisdiction of an -offense 'be- in two or more counties, the defendant shall be tried in the county in which he is first arrested, unless an indictment for the offense be pending in another county. ’ ’”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““To carry this doctrine of diligence to its logical conclusion, if before an indictment is returned, an officer has in his hands at the same time, process for the arrest of the offender for the same offense from two or more counties having jurisdiction, he should execute first the process which came to his hands, or was issued first. Of course, in cases, of felony, an arrest may be made without process, if the arresting party has reasonable grounds.to believe that the arrested party has committed a felony, and in such a state of case, the arrest would be as effective to give jurisdiction as if made upon a warrant, but the officer with a warrant in his hands cannot, in good faith, disregard the warrant and arrest, as if he had no process, .and thus establish jurisdic tion in the county where he made the arrest, and defeat the attaching of jurisdiction of the person of the offender in the county from which the warrant issued. ’ ’”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.