Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 313 ILL 508 - People v. Cochran

People v. Cochran’s Empirical Analysis

1924

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
February 1992
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 45 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1992 · most notably United States v. Washington (1977), 94 Ill. 2d 378 - People v. Free (1983)

3 federal appellate · 45 state decisions

13019241930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Lincoln v. French · Bartholomew v. People · Guardian Mutual Life Ins. v. Hogan · Dacey v. People · Helbig v. Citizens' Insurance

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

  1. ““There is evidence in the record that while in the insane asylum at Wichita Falls plaintiff in error was suffering from an attack of insanity from which a patient never recovers. By instruction No. 7 the jury might be led into the erroneous belief that if plaintiff in error was sane prior to his incarceration in the insane asylum at Wichita Falls, that he then voluntarily drank intoxicating liquor knowing that it would make him insane, that he then became insane as the result of drinking such intoxicating liquor and that that insanity continued down to the time he killed his wife, such insanity would not be a defense even though it was to such an extent that he was not able to distinguish between right and wrong, or, being able to distinguish between right and wrong, had not sufficient mentality and will power to refrain from doing the act which resulted in the death of his wife. Long continued habits of intemperance which produce permanent mental diseases amounting to insanity, which so weaken and impair the mind that one committing an offense has not mind enough at the time to know right from wrong and has not sufficient mind and power of will to refrain from doing the act, relieve a person from responsibility under the law. Insanity of this sort and thus produced is the same, in law, as insanity arising from other causes.” (Emphasis added.) Cochran, 313 Ill. at 517-18 , 145 N.E. at 211 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “under (the) guise of examining him as to the guilt of someone else”
    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.