Houston v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1937
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently December 2008
18 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 Postell v. Commonwealth · Cornelison v. Commonwealth · Mounts v. Commonwealth · Johnson v. Commonwealth · Williams 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““After the jury had retired to their room and had considered the case for a while, this occurred: ‘The jury returned to the court room and asked the following question: Under this indictment under the Habitual Criminal Act, if we give this man life, would that prevent him being pardoned under this Habitual Criminal Act?” Judge: “No, it would not prevent that.” Counsel for defendant excepts to the question asked and the ruling of the court on the question. Judge: “I didn’t rule on it, I just answered it.” Defendant excepts to the answer. * * * ’ $ ‡ * sje ^ * “The question asked by the jury related solely to what a co-ordinate branch of the government could do, which was a point of law that was not involved in this case and not one of this jury’s concern, and instead of answering the question as he did the court should have said something like this: ‘Section 225 of the Criminal Code of Practice requires me to give you in writing all the law of the case and I have done so in the instruction I have given you. That is all I am allowed to tell you.’ “In the case of Postell v. Com., 174 Ky. 272 , 192 S.W. 39, 44 , this court learned in some way, a similar question and answer had been made, and although it did not appear in the bill of exceptions, that judgment was reversed for other reasons. This court regarded what was said and done there of enough importance to condemn it ‘for the guidance of the trial and other courts in the future.’ Many sessions of the General Assembly have si”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCray 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.