Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 200 Ga. 626 - Napper v. State

Napper v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
October 2020
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently October 2020

19 state decisions

60194619501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Mullis v. State · Griffin v. State · Coleman v. State · Whitworth v. State · Currie 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Although the parties had engaged in a struggle, and there was evidence from which it might have been inferred that the deceased, who was unarmed, was the assailant, yet where it appeared that he retired, declining further contest, and that the defendant, with an open knife in his hand, pursued the deceased, and inflicted five wounds, one of which proved fatal, the evidence was sufficient to warrant a verdict of guilty of murder. . . The fight, pursuit, number of wounds, and the attendant circumstances were amply sufficient to justify the jury in finding the defendant guilty of murder. . . It was for them to say whether the interval between the assault and the homicide was sufficient cooling time to permit the voice of reason and humanity to be heard.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “There was certainly a lapse of time between the time when the accused freed himself from the arrest by the policeman and the fatal shooting by the defendant, and under the law it was the exclusive duty of the jury to say whether or not this interval was sufficient for the voice of reason and humanity to be heard. If so, the law would attribute the slaying to deliberate revenge, and the slayer would be guilty of murder.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “and there is not a particle of evidence to warrant the conclusion or to even arouse a suspicion that there was `likely to be a failure of justice for want of an officer to issue a warrant.'”
    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.