Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 299 S.C. 456 - State v. Austin

State v. Austin’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
1
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably State v. Langley (1999), State v. Condrey (2002)

39 state decisions

2401989199020002010decided

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 State v. Kimbrell · State v. Hall · State v. Lawson

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

  1. “[A] principal in a crime is one who either in person perpetrates the crime or who being present aids, abeits [sic] and assists in the commission of that crime. When one does an act in the presence of and with the assistance of another, the act is done by both. And where two or more, acting with a common design or a common intent, are present at the commission of a crime, it matters not by whose immediate agency that crime is committed because all would be guilty. Intent, however, ladies and gentlemen, is a necessary element, for there must have been a common design or intent to commit the crime and the crime must have been committed pursuant thereto with the person aiding and abeiting [sic] by some overt act.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[I]f the trial judge refuses to give a specific charge, there is no error if the charge actually given sufficiently covers the substance of the request.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[a] request to charge a correct statement of the law on an issue raised by the indictment and the evidence presented at trial should not be refused.”
    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.