Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 223 SE2D 296 - State v. Davis

State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably State v. Hutchins (1981), State v. Silhan (1981)

2 federal appellate · 47 state decisions

26019761980199020002010decided

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 Pointer v. United States · Simuel v. United States · Pope v. Nebraska · Michigan v. Ohio · Florida Citrus Exposition, Inc. v. Hungerford Construction Co.

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

  1. “[i]f such consolidation hinders or deprives the accused of his ability to present his defense.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A defendant fails to show abuse of discretion on the part of the trial judge in joining two offenses for trial where defendant's only assertion of possible prejudice is that he might have elected to testify in one of the cases and not in the others.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"Now, members of the jury, a killing would be excused entirely on the ground of self-defense. First, if it appeared to the defendant and he believed it to be necessary to shoot Johnny Conwell in order [to] save himself from death or great bodily harm; and second, the circumstances as they appear [sic] to the defendant at the time were sufficient to create such a belief in the mind of a person of ordinary firmness. It is for you, members of the jury, to determine the reasonableness of the defendant's belief from the circumstances as they appeared to him at the time. In making this determination you should consider the circumstances as you find them to have existed from the evidence that the fierceness of the assault, if there was any upon the defendant, and whether or not Johnny Conwell had any sort of weapon in his possession. . . ."”
    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.