Lawson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1931
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently October 1999
12 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 Albrecht v. United States · Blitz v. United States · People Ex Rel. Tweed v. . Liscomb · State v. Stewart · Glover 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Although the weight of authority is that courts have power derived from the common law to impose cumulative sentences on conviction of several offenses charged in separate indictments, or in separate counts of the same indictment, the imprisonment under one to commence at the termination of that under the other, 8 R. C. L. 240; note 7 L. R. A. (N. S.) 125, it has long been settled to the contrary in this state, Miller v. Allen (1858), 11 Ind. 389 ; Kennedy v. Howard (1881), 74 Ind. 87 ; Peed v. Brewster (1906), 168 Ind. 51 , 79 N. E. 1039 , and the effect of a conviction of separate offenses and judgments for imprisonment rendered on the same date, is that the time of imprisonment on each judgment will run at the same time, Peed v. Brewster, supra, the judgment, in effect, being on the count giving the longest sentence.” 202 Ind. at 587-588 , 177 N. E. at 267 (footnotes omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Stuck v. State““Distinct offenses of a different character, or inconsistent offenses, cannot be joined in separate counts of the same affidavit, but different crimes of the same character growing out of the same transaction, may be so charged.” (Emphasis added)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Doss v. State
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.