State v. Handy’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
92 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 92 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably State v. Braxton (2000), State v. Bishop (1997)
92 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 Hankerson v. North Carolina · State v. Coffey · State v. Ahearn · State v. Hankerson · Ashford v. Lynaugh
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 92 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where there is a continuous transaction, the temporal order of the killing and the taking is immaterial. Provided that the theft and the killing are aspects of a single transaction, it is immaterial whether the intent to commit the theft was formed before or after the killing.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Neither the commission of armed robbery ... nor the commission of felony murder based on armed robbery depends upon whether the intention to commit the taking of the victim's property was formed before or after the killing.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“I charge for you to find the defendant guilty of first-degree murder under the theory of the Murder Felony Rule [sic], the State must prove three things beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that the defendant, Michael Jerome Braxton, committed or attempted to commit or was acting in concert with someone who was committing or attempted to commit — to commit robbery. . . . And, second, that while committing or attempting to commit the robbery or acting in concert with someone who was attempting or committing or attempting to commit robbery, that the defendant, Michael Jerome Braxton, killed Emmanuel Oguayo with a deadly weapon. And, third, that the defendant’s act was a proximate cause of Emmanuel Oguayo’s death. A proximate cause, like I have told you, is a real cause, a cause without which Emmanuel Oguayo’s death would not have occurred.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Braxton
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.