Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 32 DEL 225 - State v. Frantz

State v. Frantz’s Empirical Analysis

1922

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
April 1967
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently April 1967

10 state decisions

8019221930194019501960decided

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.

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

  1. ““The degree of credit which ought to be given to testimony of an ap-complice is a matter exclusively within the province of the jury. “Great caution in weighing such testimony is dictated by prudence and good reason. A jury may convict upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, yet the better rule is that a conviction should not be had unless such testimony is corroborated in some material part by either direct or circumstantial evidence. But a jury may convict upon the testimony of an accomplice if they are satisfied from all the facts and circumstances of the case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it is true, without., any confirmation of such testimony; and in such case it would be their duty to do so.””
    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.