Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 28 MINN 216 - State v. Lawlor

State v. Lawlor’s Empirical Analysis

1881

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
13
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably State v. Reed (1894), State v. Mathiasen (1964)

43 state decisions — followed in 13 states

10018811890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Smith v. Handy · Erwin v. State · People v. Ames · Murphy v. . People of the State of N.Y. · Murray v. State

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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““A conviction cannot be had upon the testimony of an accomplice, unless he is corroborated by such other evidence as tends to convict the defendant of the commission of the offense, and the corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the offense or the circumstances thereof.” Cl. S. 1894, § 5767.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““A reasonable construction of this section does not require a case to be made out against the prisoner sufficient for his conviction before the testimony of an accomplice can be considered, for that would make it available only when its necessity did not exist; neither do the terms used require such an interpretation. The corroborating evidence must, independently of the testimony of the accomplice, tend in some degree to establish the guilt of the accused, but need not be sufficiently weighty or full, as, standing alone, to justify a conviction,” — citing People v. Ames, 39 Cal. 403 ; Montgomery v. State, 40 Ala. 684 ; Craft v. State, 3 Kan. 450 .”
    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.