Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 43 CONNAPP 252 - State v. Crump

State v. Crump’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
1
states following
April 2021
most recently cited

55 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably State v. Chasse (1998), State v. Fuller (2000)

55 state decisions

2801996200020102020decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · State v. Golding · State v. Evans · In re Disbarment of Adelman · King v. Lynaugh

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

  1. “there was an agreement between two or more persons to cause the death of another person and that the agreement was followed by an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy by any one of the conspirators.... In addition, the state also must show that the conspirators intended to cause the death of another person.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The existence of a formal agreement between parties need not be proved. It is sufficient to show that they are knowingly engaged in a mutual plan to do a forbidden act.... Because of the secret nature of a conspiracy, a conviction is usually based on circumstantial evidence.... The state need not prove that the defendant and a coconspirator shook hands, whispered in each other's ear, signed papers, or used any magic words such as we have an agreement.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Intent to cause the death of a person is an element of the crime [of murder] and must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.... Intent may, however, be inferred from conduct ... and from the cumulative effect of the circumstantial evidence and the rational inferences drawn therefrom.”
    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.