Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 301 A.2d 348 - State v. Inman

State v. Inman’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
January 1990
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 1990

6 state decisions

40197319801990decided

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 Brinegar v. United States · United States v. Rabinowitz · United States v. Dionisio · Davis v. Mississippi · Brooks v. Tennessee

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

  1. ““Experts in dactylography recognize that palm prints have the characteristic of uniqueness and that they contain reference points that enable accurate and conclusive comparisons just as do fingerprints.’’ (Emphasis added.) State v. Inman, supra, 301 A.2d at 353 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““When one’s fingerprints are found in a particular place such person cannot be heard to say he was not at that place at some time.””
    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.