Saienni v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 2019
9 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 Carroll v. United States · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Chambers v. Maroney · United States v. Marion · Sedillo v. United States
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.
“Section 523 takes what the Model Penal Code commentary calls a “unilateral approach.” That is, attention is focused on each individual’s culpability. [[Image here]] It is a well-settled principle of law that a man may be convicted of conspiracy, if there is proof of agreement and an overt act, despite the failure of the State to apprehend or convict the other conspirators, unless, perhaps, the reason for failing to convict them is so related to the liability of the defendant that convicting him while acquitting the others would violate due process and deprive him of equal protection of the law. The present Code made no change in these principles.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“It is no defense to a prosecution for criminal conspiracy that, because of irresponsibility or other legal incapacity or exemption, or because of unawareness of the criminal nature of the agreement or the conduct contemplated or of the defendant's criminal purpose, or because of other factors precluding the mental state required for commission of the conspiracy or the crime contemplated, one or more of the defendant's co-conspirators could not be guilty of the conspiracy of the crime contemplated.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section a person may be convicted under the law of this State of an offense committed by his own conduct or by the conduct of another for which he is legally accountable if: [[Image here]] (2) Conduct occurring outside the State is sufficient under Delaware law to constitute a conspiracy to commit an offense within the State and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy occurs within the State . . . ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Carter v. State
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.