Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 199 Ark. 196 - Johnson v. State

Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1939

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
1
states following
February 2022
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably Kaylor v. Fields (1981), State v. Eason and Fletcher (1940)

4 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

1001939194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Whitmore v. State · Lee v. State · State v. Ward · Richards v. State · Binganan 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ ‘The prosecuting attorney of a county is a quasi judicial officer. The law has intrusted him with power, upon what he deems sufficient cause, to institute proceedings. He takes the place of a grand jury ***.’ ” (Our emphasis).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““All offenses heretofore required to be prosecuted by indictment may be prosecuted either by indictment by a grand jury or information filed by the Prosecuting Attorney. ’ ’”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““It will be observed that the prosecuting attorney, in filing information, takes the place of the grand jury. It has been said that this is a great power carrying with it possibilities of great oppression if improperly used. There is some conflict in the authorities, but we are of opinion that under the above amendment to the Constitution [Amendment 21, supra], information charging one with a crime must be filed in the name of the prosecuting attorney. It is true that it is generally said that a deputy prosecuting attorney, legally appointed, is generally clothed with all the powers and privileges of the prosecuting attorney, but he must file the information in the name of the prosecuting attorney. In other words, it is the prosecuting attorney that is given the authority to file information, and not the deputy prosecuting attorney. The deputy, of course, may. file information in the name of the prosecuting attorney, but he signs the name of the prosecuting attorney, and then his name as deputy.” [Emphasis ours.]”
    1 later decision 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.