Stull v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently October 2016 · most notably Dingler v. State (1975), State v. Eubanks (1977)
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 52 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 Martin v. State · Jackson v. State · Mixon v. State · Harris v. State · 66 Ga. App. 147 - Kent 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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Even though language used by the appellate courts in a decision may embody sound law, it is not always appropriate to employ such language in instructing the jury.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“. inten[ded] ,.. to extend credit, not to the accused, but to the corporation or business firm which they thought the accused represented. They intended to sell the property to the corporation. They delivered possession to the accused, not for himself, but as they supposed, as agent. He was not the agent of the business firm which they were led to believe he represented, and the personnel of that firm did not know anything about hipa or his activities. It is clear that the accused intended to appropriate the proceeds of the property, the possession of which he thus acquired, to his own use.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The uncertainty in a statute which will amount to a denial of due process of law is not the difficulty of ascertaining whether close cases fall within or without the prohibition of the statute but whether the standard established by the statute is so uncertain that it cannot be determined with reasonable definiteness that any particular act is disapproved.”
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.