Hoke v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently June 1999
10 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 In Re Opinions of the Justices · Lott v. State · Clark v. State · Hinton v. State · American Sand & Gravel Co. v. Reeves
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is well settled in this State that the possession of property recently stolen is a circumstance which may be considered by the jury and from which, in the absence of a reasonable explanation, the jury may infer guilt of larceny. Lott v. State, 204 Miss. 610 , 37 So.2d 782 ; Haney v. State, 199 Miss. 568 , 24 So.2d 778 ; Moody v. State, 181 Miss. 277 , 179 So. 335 ; Huddleston v. State, 220 Miss. 292 , 70 So.2d 621 ; Fletcher v. State, 168 Miss. 361 , 151 So. 477 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Engbrecht v. State“Motion for new trial must be made where it is contended that the verdict of the jury is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.”
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.