Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 Ga. App. 134 - State v. Forthe

237 Ga. App. 134 - State v. Forthe’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
February 2010
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2010

8 state decisions

60199920002010decided

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 v. Simmons · Frisbie v. United States · State v. Eubanks · Sharpe v. Department of Transportation · Jackson 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The true test of the sufficiency of the indictment is not whether it could have been made more definite and certain, but whether it contains the elements of the offense intended to be charged, and sufficiently apprises the defendant of what he must be prepared to meet, and, in case any other proceedings are taken against him for a similar offense, whether the record shows with accuracy to what extent he may plead a former acquittal or conviction.” (Punctuation omitted; emphasis supplied.) Jordan v. State, 220 Ga. App. 627, 629 ( 470 SE2d 242 ) (1996). “It is useful to remember that the purpose of the indictment is to allow defendant to prepare his defense intelligently and to protect him from double jeopardy.” State v. Eubanks, 239 Ga. 483, 484-485 ( 238 SE2d 38 ) (1977).”
    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.