State v. Hudson’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 129 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 139 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2006 · most notably State v. Square (1971), 278 So. 2d 485 - State v. Douglas (1973)
2 federal appellate · 129 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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · State v. Johnson · State v. Hunter · State v. Barksdale · State v. Gatlin
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 139 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The jury in all criminal cases shall be the judges of the law and of the facts on the question of guilt or innocence, having been charged as to the law applicable to the case by the presiding judge.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In a jury trial the court may direct a verdict of not guilty of one or more of the offenses charged, on its own motion or on that of a defendant, after the close of the state’s evidence or of all the evidence, if the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction. “In a trial by the judge alone the court shall enter a judgment of acquittal on one or more of the offenses charged, on its own motion or on that of a de fendant, after the close of the state’s ■evidence or of all the evidence, if the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction. “If the court denies a defendant’s motion for a directed verdict or judgment of acquittal at the close of the state’s ■ case, the defendant may offer his evidence in defense.” 2 (Emphasis ours.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Arnold“"* * * the bill of particulars is designed to assure the defendant that he will have sufficient information before trial to properly prepare his defense. State v. Barksdale, 247 La. 198 , 170 So.2d 374 (1965). He is entitled to know what the State intends to prove; but the bill of particulars cannot be employed as a fishing expedition for a recital of the details of the State's evidence, nor used as a device to harass the State by demands for nonessentials. See Comment, The Bill of Particulars in Criminal Trials, 12 La.L.Rev. 457 (1952)."”
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.