McManus v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1936
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently September 1971
10 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 Bennett v. Commonwealth · Mills v. Commonwealth
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The law applicable to search of one’s person or premises, or the obtention of confessions from an accused, is likewise applicable to the case under consideration, and the questions whether the examination of appellant’s person was made with or without his consent should have been submitted to the jury under appropriate instructions. The court should have instructed the jury, in substance, that, if they believe from the evidence the examination of appel lant’s person was made against his will and without his consent, such evidence obtained thereby was illegal and incompetent and not to consider it for any purpose; but, if made with his consent or without objections by him, it was competent for their consideration. Bennett v. Com., 226 Ky. 529 , 11 S.W. (2d) 437 , and cases therein cited. See, also, M. J. Wragg v. Griffin, Sheriff, 185 Iowa, 243 , 170 N.W. 400 , 2 A.L.R. 1327 ; State v. Height, 117 Iowa 650 , 91 N.W. 935 , 59 L.R.A. 437 , 94 Am.St. Rep. 323. “The failure of the court to instruct the jury as above indicated was error.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lorenz 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.