State v. Auld’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 89 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 98 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably State v. Lucas (1959), State v. Kociolek (1957)
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 89 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 Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Raffel v. United States · Commonwealth v. DiStasio · State v. Genna · La Guardia 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 98 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[o]ne unable to comprehend his position, to consult intelligently with counsel and plan his defense cannot be put to trial.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]f the record shows affirmatively that the communication had no tendency to influence the verdict the judge's impropriety in communicating with the jury out of the presence of the defendant does not require a reversal.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“if supplementary instructions are deemed necessary, they shall be given only in open court in the presence of the parties and their counsel, if they choose to attend, or after affording them an opportunity to be present.”
2 later decisions 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.