Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 224 Ind. 531 - Caudill v. State

Caudill v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

82
cited by 82 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
January 1982
most recently cited

80 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 82 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1982 · most notably Jackson v. Denno (1964), Dembowski v. State (1968)

80 state decisions

25019461950196019701980decided

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 United States Marcus v. Hess · Hauk v. State · Mack v. State · Hicks v. State · Hawkins 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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ ‘The securing of voluntary confessions from guilty criminals is to be desired, and the reasonable examination of prisoners charged with or suspected of crime is and should be allowed in the interest of public welfare and safety, but such examination should be kept within proper bounds. The law protects persons charged with crime from ill or unjust treatment, and cruel and brutal methods should never be tolerated. Bonahoon v. State (1931), 203 Ind. 51 , 178 N. E. 570 .’ ” Caudill v. State (1946), supra, 224 Ind. 531, 538 , 69 N. E. 2d 549, 552 .”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The confession of a defendant made under inducement, with all the circumstances, may be given in evidence against him, except when made under the influence of fear produced by threats or by intimidation or undue influence; but a confession made under inducement is not sufficient to warrant a conviction without corroborating evidence.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"Robbery — Assault and battery with intent to commit robbery — Physical injury inflicted in robbery or attempt — Penalty. — Whoever takes from the person of another any article of value by violence or by putting in fear, is guilty of robbery, and on conviction shall be imprisoned not less than ten (10) years nor more than twenty-five (25) years, and be disfranchised and rendered incapable of holding any office of trust or profit for any determinate period. Whoever inflicts any wound or other physical injury upon any person with any firearm, dirk, stiletto, bludgeon, billy, club, blackjack, or any other deadly or dangerous weapon or instrument while engaged in the commission of a robbery, or while attempting to commit a robbery, shall, upon conviction, be imprisoned in the state prison for life." Sec. 10-4101 Burns' 1942 Repl.”
    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.