Thorpe v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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

1. ““Now some of the other assignments of error may have some merit in them insofar as the sole question of whether or not some phases of the trial were erroneous. In fact we think the Assistant Attorney General was guilty of improper conduct in repeatedly asking questions about collateral matters that did not involve moral turpitude and ordinarily this would in all probability have brought about a reversal of the case on account of its similarity to the situation in Gray v. State, 191 Tenn. 526 , 235 S.W.2d 20 . We have examined this entire record very carefully, however, and we are of the opinion that none of the matters raised in the other assignments, even if erroneous, v/ere prejudicial, and therefore, under the harmless error statute we will not reverse.” Thorpe v. State, 202 Tenn. 298 , 304 S.W.2d 309 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 3 Tenn. Crim. App. 362 - McKenzie v. State

2. ““In Truss v. State, 81 Tenn. 311 , it is held that there are no accomplices in misdemeanor cases; therefore corroboration was unnecessary. That case has never been overruled and we see no reason to do so now. ’’ 202 Tenn. at 300 , 304 S.W.2d at 310 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Warden v. State