Murphy v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently July 2009 · most notably United States v. Bradley (1991), Morgan v. Town of Heidelberg (1963)
3 federal appellate · 33 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 Byars v. United States · People v. Defore · State v. Gibbons · Robertson v. State · Hughes 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is well settled by the law of arrest that it is not necessary to effect an arrest that there be a manual touching of the body or a formal declaration of arrest; it is sufficient if the person arrested understands that he is in the power of the one arresting and submits in consequence. 4 Am.Jur., § 2, pp. 5, 6; Robertson v. State, 184 Tenn. 277, 284 , 198 S.W.2d 633 . There are numerous cases holding that “requisite control may be assumed without force, or without any visible physical restraint.” 6 C.J.S., Arrest, § 1, p. 571. Murphy v. State, 194 Tenn. 698 , 254 S.W.2d 979 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Nix v. State
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.