36 Ala. App. 634 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

cited by 40 later decisions

states following

January 1988

most recently cited

40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently January 1988 · most notably Boswell v. State (1973), 41 Ala. App. 85 - Lindsay v. State (1960)

40 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 People v. Grijalva · 31 Ala. App. 608 - Bringhurst v. State · Johnson v. State · 118 Cal. App. 593 - People v. Kinsley · Hill v. State

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

“"[E]ntrapment is not available as a defense to a person who has the intent and design to commit a criminal offense and who in fact does commit the essential acts constituting it, merely because an officer of the law, in his effort to secure evidence against such person, affords him an opportunity to commit the criminal act. . . ."”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Griffith v. State · Suiter v. State
““However, this witness, under the undisputed proof, was not an accomplice within the contemplation of the law. His acts were not motivated by any criminal intent to violate the law. His participation was not criminally corrupt. “The following authorities sustain our view: 22 C.J.S., Criminal Law, § 788, p. 1340; Lett v. U. S., 8 Cir., 15 F.2d 690 ; Gonzales v. State, 108 Tex.Cr.R. 253 , 299 S.W. 901 ; People v. Kinsley, 118 Cal.App. 593 , 5 P.2d 938 ; People v. Abair, 102 Cal.App.2d 765 , 228 P.2d 336 ; People v. Mimms, 110 Cal.App.2d 310 , 242 P.2d 331 ; People v. Grijalva, supra [ 48 Cal.App.2d 690 , 121 P.2d 32 ] ; Finley v. State, 84 Okl.Cr. 309 , 181 P.2d 849 .” 61 So.2d at 869 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. State v. Moraga

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.