People v. Arnold’s Empirical Analysis
1910
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently October 1992 · most notably People v. Munday (1917), 39 Ill. 2d 40 - The PEOPLE v. Long (1968)
3 federal appellate · 36 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 Taylor v. Felsing · Pietsch v. Pietsch · Gitchell v. People · Hellyer v. People · Sands v. Potter
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““They [the bloody clothing] were not the instruments of any crime, and had no tendency to prove any fact, except that the hemorrhage occurred, which was not in controversy. The exhibition was necessarily prejudicial to the defendant, and would create a prejudice which it would be impossible to meet and overcome. It should not have been permitted.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“there could have been no prejudice to the defendant from anything that occurred before the Grand Jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.