State v. Leigh’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably State v. Bondurant (1983), State v. Summrell (1972)
50 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 Dennis v. United States · Stromberg v. People of State of California · American Communications Ass'n v. Douds · Schenck v. United States · Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co.
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.
““The general rule is that merely remonstrating with an officer in behalf of another, or criticizing or questioning an officer while he is performing his duty, when done in an orderly manner, does not amount to obstructing or delaying an officer in the performance of -his duties.... It logically follows that a citizen may advise another of his constitutional rights in an orderly and peaceable manner while the officer is performing his duty without necessarily obstructing or delaying the officer in the performance of his duty.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[f]reedom of speech is not an unlimited, unqualified right. Speech may be subordinated to other values and considerations, and may be reasonably restrained as to time and place. It is well settled that, within proper limits, the right of free speech is subject to legislative restriction when such restriction is in the public interest. ... The constitutional right of freedom of speech does not extend ... to every use and abuse of the spoken and written word.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““the officer was obstructed or interfered with, and that such obstruction or interference was willful on the part of the defendant. ... To ‘interfere’ is to check or hamper the action of the officer, or to do something which hinders or prevents or tends to prevent the performance of his legal duty; and to ‘obstruct’ signifies direct or indirect opposition or resistace [sic] to the lawful discharge of his official duty.””
2 later decisions 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.