Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1935
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently June 1999
11 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.
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To sustain this contention of the state would be to observe the form of the constitutional direction and deny its substance. The second indictment was a continuation of the prosecution begun by the first.... Both indictments charged the same offense. The constitutional right which had accrued as a bar to the further prosecution of the first indictment would be defeated by evasion, if the state could avoid the consequences of its delay by the simple expedient of abandoning the first and presenting a new indictment.... Here, the prosecution was begun when the first indictment was returned, and the statute of limitation was tolled by that indictment. ... The judgment of the trial court will be reversed, and the plaintiff in error discharged. 73”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Jefferson
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.