Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 214 La. 744 - State v. Masino

State v. Masino’s Empirical Analysis

1949

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
1
states following
November 2014
most recently cited

77 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently November 2014 · most notably State v. Hunter (1967), State v. Gerstenberger (1971)

77 state decisions

32019491950196019701980199020002010decided

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 State v. Bessar

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

  1. “the fact that defendants may have a good defense is not sufficient grounds to quash the indictment”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"The indictment * * * being in the short form * * * the defendant was entitled to a bill of particulars * * * and this bill, when furnished, operated to limit the scope of proof on the trial by restricting the introduction of evidence to the proof of those facts set out in the bill of particulars * * Consequently, the court in considering the motion to quash the indictment must construe those facts as set out in the bill of particulars to be true and determine whether or not if proved they constitute the crime charged." (Emphasis supplied.) [2]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"The court, in considering the motion to quash the indictment, must construe those facts as set out in the bill of particulars to be true and determine whether or not, if proved, they constitute the crime charged. It is of no moment whether we say that a bill of particulars is an amendment or an amplification of the indictment or a restriction of proof to be offered by the State * * * The issue to be decided on a motion to quash is whethor not the indictment itself is defective on its face, taking as true what is alleged in the bill of particulars. * *"”
    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.