Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 231 Ga. 401 - Mathis v. State

Mathis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
1
states following
March 2004
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 56 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently March 2004 · most notably Cain v. State (1975), Jarrell v. State (1975)

3 federal appellate · 56 state decisions

3801973198019902000decided

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 Bruton v. United States · Schneble v. Florida · Roberts v. Russell · Henderson v. State · Pass 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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “However, this court in Wade v. State, 231 Ga. 131 ( 200 SE2d 271 ), held that Code Ann. §§ 27-2502, 27-2534 and 27-2510 when construed together allow the jury in felony cases to fix the punishment of the convicted person and that unless the jury specifies that the sentences imposed are to run consecutively, then the law is that they shall run concurrently. Therefore, we hold that the trial judge was not authorized to provide that the ten-year aggravated assault sentence was to run consecutively after the termination of the armed robbery sentence. It is directed that this portion of the trial court's sentence be stricken and that the two sentences run concurrently since the jury did not state they were to run consecutively.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “only provides that the jurisdiction of the superior courts over juvenile felony offenders is not exclusive, `in the case of juvenile offenders as provided by law.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the superior court did not have jurisdiction to try him for the offenses charged.”
    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.