Lee v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
2 district · 94 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 96 later decisions — most recently March 2011 · most notably Aaron v. State (1961), Noble v. State (1950)
2 district · 94 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 Johnson v. State · 29 Ala. App. 349 - Wilkins v. State · Jackson v. State · Daniels v. State · Campbell 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 96 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The fact of Ruby’s pregnancy, through the agency of her father, does tend to shed light on the main inquiry, but unlike the fact of sexual intercourse with her father, it also tends to unduly multiply the issues and to divert the minds of the jury from the main issue.””
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“as bearing upon the motive, intent, scienter, identity, etc.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““ ‘In inquiries of fact, dependent on circumstantial evidence for their solution, no certain mle can be laid down, which will define, with unerring accuracy, what collateral facts and circumstances are sufficiently proximate to justify their admission in evidence. Human transactions are too varied, to admit of such clear decía,ration of the rule. Whatever tends to shed light on the main inquiry, and does not withdraw attention from such main inquiry, by obtruding upon the minds of the jury matters which are foreign, or of questionable pertinency, is, as a general rule, admissible evidence. On the other hand, undue multiplication of the issues is to be steadily guarded against, as tending to divert the minds of jurors from the main issue.’ ””
2 later decisions 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.