State v. Tiedt’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
101 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 101 later decisions — most recently November 1998 · most notably State v. Spica (1965), State v. Laster (1956)
101 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 State v. Tiedt · State v. Hepperman · State v. Shilkett · Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Harriett · State v. Taylor
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 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Whether or not a particular improper argument is so prejudicial under the facts in the particular case, as to necessitate a reprimand of counsel or a discharge of the jury, is largely within the discretion of the trial court. An appellate court will not interfere unless the record shows that the trial court abused its discretion to the prejudice of the appellant."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brooks · State v. Rothaus“The instruction was properly refused. If, under the evidence and instructions of the court, the jury found defendant guilty of murder in the first degree, it was for the jury to fix the punishment. The matter of punishment, within the limits fixed by the statute, was solely within the discretion of the jury under all of the facts and circumstances in evidence. Secs. 4378, 4092, R.S. 1939, Mo.R.S.A.; State v. Bevins, 328 Mo. 1046 , 43 S.W.2d 432, 434 ; State v. Creighton, 330 Mo. 1176 , 52 S.W.2d 556, 563 ; Ex parte Dusenberry, 97 Mo. 504 , 11 S.W. 217 . No question of reasonable doubt was involved in the matter of assessing the punishment. People v. Krauser, 315 Ill. 485 , 146 N.E. 593, 605 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“`... the law relative to the right to receive the benefit of the doubt as to the severity of punishment'; that, if defendant was guilty of murder in the first degree, `he was entitled to the benefit of a reasonable doubt * * * as to whether he should be given the death penalty or given a life sentence'; and that the `same benefit of reasonable doubt should apply in fixing punishment as well as in determining whether any punishment should be assessed.'”
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.