Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 216 GAAPP 21 - Evans v. State

Evans v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
1
states following
September 2016
most recently cited

37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably 223 Ga. App. 838 - State v. Banks (1996), 219 Ga. App. 239 - Edwards v. State (1995)

37 state decisions

210199520002010decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · 202 Ga. App. 204 - Hayes v. State · 204 Ga. App. 491 - Barnett v. State · 207 Ga. App. 545 - Jorgensen v. State · 178 Ga. App. 261 - Adams 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The “substantial step” language of OCGA § 16-4-1 shifts the emphasis from what remains to be done to what the actor has already done. The fact that further steps must be taken before the crime can be completed does not preclude such a finding that the steps already undertaken are substantial. In addition to assuring firmness of criminal purpose, the requirement of a substantial step will remove very remote preparatory acts from the ambit of attempt liability and the relatively stringent sanctions imposed for attempts.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[The appellants’] discussion regarding the theft of a car stereo and their possession of tools to aid in the commission of such a theft, without more, would not have amounted to an attempt to enter an automobile, but merely would have been preparatory acts not proximately leading to the consummation of the crime of entering an automobile. [The appellants], however, went beyond these remote acts of preparation when they drove to the shopping center parking lots in search of a specific car to enter.”
    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.