Froedge v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently September 2004 · most notably 21 Cal. 3d 562 - People v. Caudillo (1978), 100 Cal. App. 3d 660 - People v. Covino (1980)
59 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 Capps v. State · Beatty v. State · Denton v. State · Newport v. State · Reno 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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“" Great bodily harm defines itself and means great as distinguished from slight, trivial, minor or moderate harm, and as such does not include mere bruises as are likely to be inflicted in a simple assault and battery under Ind. Ann. Stat. § 10-403 (Supp. 1967)." (emphasis in original).”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage““Whoever intentionally or knowingly and unlawfully inflicts great bodily harm or disfigurement upon another person is guilty of aggravated assault and battery and upon conviction shall be imprisoned in the state prison for not less than one [1] year nor more than five [5] years, to which may be added a fine in any amount not to exceed one thousand dollars [$1,000].””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage““in harmony with the modern trend of judicial thinking under similar statutes evidencing as they do an intent to eliminate technical and formal defects which in no way prejudice the defendant or affect his substantial rights. This is a judicial postulate that is necessary to the administration of justice and the elimination of narrow technical formalism in the theory and applications of the principles of criminal law . . .” Froedge v. State (1968), 249 Ind. 438 , 233 N. E. 2d 631 ,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Helms v. State
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.