Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 246 Miss. 442 - Poole v. State

Poole v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1963

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
November 2011
most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently November 2011 · most notably Taylor v. State (1996), 360 So. 2d 1244 - Miles v. State (1978)

26 state decisions

80196319701980199020002010decided

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 Spears v. State · Pitts v. State · Pope v. State · Stringfellow v. State · Barnes 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[c]orroborative proof will be held sufficient which satisfies the mind that it is real and not an imaginary crime for which [the] accused has confessed.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The definition of corpus delicti literally is "body or substance of the crime, "meaning that a crime has actually been committed, having as a compound fact (1) the existence of a certain act or result forming the basis of the criminal charge, and (2) the existence of criminal agency as the cause of this act or result. The identity of the accused is not an element of the corpus delicti. Every element, criminal charge and criminal agency, must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt; extra judicial admissions, declarations or confessions of accused are not of themselves sufficient to establish the corpus delicti.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “In order for the corpus delicti to be established by evidence aliunde the confessions, it is not necessary that the proof aliunde should show the crime or corpus delicti beyond a reasonable doubt, but it is sufficient to show it by a preponderance of the evidence or by evidence amounting to a probability, and that the confessions will be received, and, if the confessions coupled with the proof of the corpus delicti aliunde show the corpus delicti beyond a reasonable doubt, it is sufficient.”
    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.