Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 316 S.C. 57 - State v. Prince

State v. Prince’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
1
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 41 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently April 2016 · most notably State v. Walker (2005), State v. Needs (1998)

2 federal appellate · 41 state decisions

210199320002010decided

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 Gaskins v. South Carolina · State v. Bailey · State v. Furr · State v. Sullivan · State v. Ford

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

  1. “It is well-established that, in ruling on a motion for directed verdict, the trial court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State. The case should be submitted to the jury if there is any substantial evidence which reasonably tends to prove the guilt of the accused or from which guilt may be fairly and logically deduced.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) is such that it would probably change the result if a new trial were granted; (2) has been discovered since the trial; (3) could not in the exercise of due diligence have been discovered prior to the trial; (4) is material; and (5) is not merely cumulative or impeaching.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Common law offenses are not abrogated simply because there is a statutory offense proscribing similar conduct. Rather, it is presumed that no change in common law is intended unless the Legislature explicitly indicates such an intention by language in the statute.”
    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.