De Attley v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently December 1977
23 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 Dixon v. Commonwealth · Gossett v. Commonwealth · Cravens v. Commonwealth · Benge v. Commonwealth
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In the instant case there was just a fraction over two pints of liquor found in appellants’ possession and some empty beer bottles and cans. The un-contradicted testimony was that the whiskey was for Charles De Attley’s personal use and that the beer likewise had been for the personal use of his sister-in-law. While the jury is not compelled to accept the uncontradicted testimony of the accused as true, Dixon v. Com., 290 Ky. 469 , 161 S.W.2d 913 , yet where the sourrounding circumstances tend to support him and practically the only damaging evidence the Commonwealth has introduced is that of the bad reputation of the accused, a verdict of guilty is not supported by the evidence. We have many times written that a conviction in a criminal case cannot be sustained by evidence amounting to no more than a conjecture or suspicion, and when the evidence produces no more than that, a verdict should be directed in favor of the accused. Gossett v. Com., 274 Ky. 215 , 118 S.W.2d 528 ; Benge v. Com., 265 Ky. 476 , 97 S.W.2d 51 , and the many cases therein cited.””
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.