State v. Adams’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 68 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2017 · most notably State v. Torrence (1991), 44 Cal. 3d 480 - People v. Kimble (1988)
5 federal appellate · 68 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Woodson v. North Carolina · Roberts v. Louisiana · United States v. California · Harris v. State of South Carolina
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is addressed to the trial judge only and need not be divulged to the jury,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[A]ll the surrounding circumstances must be weighed before an accurate determination of whether a defendant was or was not prejudiced can be reached. State v. Hiott, supra; State v. Shoemaker[216 S.C. 86, 275 S.E.2d 878 (1981)] supra; State v. Evans, 216 S.C. 328 , 57 S.E.2d 756 (1950). In this case the statement signed by Adams itself described his mens rea. He was indicted for the crimes accompanying the housebreaking-kidnapping and murder. In addition, he was accorded a preliminary hearing. Under all the circumstances, the contention that the indictment failed to fulfill its purposes is not supported. There is no indication that the appellant was unfairly prejudiced since he obviously knew the crimes for which he was being tried.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Reddick · State v. McCloud“(a)n indictment is adequate if the offense is stated with sufficient certainty and particularity to enable the court to know what judgment to pronounce, the defendant to know what he is called upon to answer, and acquittal or conviction to be placed in bar to any subsequent prosecution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Wade · State v. Tumbleston
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.