Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 354 Mo. 265 - State v. Shipman

State v. Shipman’s Empirical Analysis

1945

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
3
states following
February 1997
most recently cited

53 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently February 1997 · most notably State v. Shilkett (1947), State v. Pigques (1958)

53 state decisions

170194519501960197019801990decided

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 State v. Bagby · State v. Jordan · State v. Comer · State v. Ackerman · Armstrong v. Winfrey

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

  1. “Such intent `may, and generally must, be proved by circumstantial evidence, for as a rule it is not susceptible of direct proof.' 12 C.J.S., Burglary, § 55, page 731. Consummation of the intent is not necessary to complete the crime of burglary. `If a person breaks and enters a house intending to steal, he is not exonerated from the commission of burglary merely because he did not steal anything or because he was frightened away before he carried out his intent * * *.' 9 Am.Jur., Burglary, § 27, pp. 254, 255.”
    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.