State v. Conally’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently February 1979
14 state decisions
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 Hamilton v. Rathbone · Hale v. Iowa State Board of Assessment and Review · Miller v. State Ex Rel. Peek · State v. Kimbrough · Nigro v. Flinn
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This court has no jurisdiction to disturb, because of alleged excessiveness, a sentence which is within the limits prescribed by statute, unless: (a) the statute itself violates the constitutional injunction, Article I, § 19, against cruel and unusual punishment, or (b) the sentence is the result of partiality, prejudice, oppression or corrupt motive. State v. Scates, 212 S. C. 150, 46 S. E. (2d) 693 ; State v. Kimbrough, 212 S. C. 348, 46 S. E. (2d) 273 ; State v. Huffstetler, 213 S. C. 319, 49 S. E. (2d) 585 ; State v. Phillips, 215 S. C. 314, 54 S. E. (2d) 901 ; State v. Goodall, 221 S. C. 175, 69 S. E. (2d) 915 ; State v. Hall, 224 S. C. 546, 80 S. E. (2d) 239 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Alexander
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.