Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 3 N.J. 337 - State v. Lennon

State v. Lennon’s Empirical Analysis

1949

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
5
states following
September 1980
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently September 1980 · most notably State v. Carbone (1952), State v. Romeo (1964)

28 state decisions

13019491950196019701980decided

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 Lustig v. United States · United States v. William Rabinowich · Gebardi v. United States · Advance-Rumely Thresher Co. v. Jackson · People v. Strauch

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

  1. “This is not a case for the operation of the principle that where it is impossible under any circumstances to commit the substantive offense without co-operative action, the preliminary agreement between the same parties to commit the offense is not an indictable conspiracy.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is not requisite that the conspirators know each other, or that they should all join in the common purpose at the same time. People v. Strauch, 240 Ill. 60 , 88 N.E. 155 (1909); Burdicks Law of Crime, Sec. 999.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “sinister combination * * far more perilous * * * than the criminal intent of a single individual”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.