Head v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 54 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Mason v. Hanks (1996), State v. Wise (1985)
2 federal appellate · 54 state decisions — followed in 15 states
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 Chapman v. State of California · Simmons v. United States · Neil v. Biggers · Kirby v. Illinois · Williams v. State of North Carolina
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hether the underlying felony has been completed or attempted, the felony-murder rule cannot be applied unless the death of another occurred by virtue of the commission or attempted commission of the underlying felony. In other words, absent death the applicability of the felony-murder rule is never triggered .... [[Image here]] ... We do not believe the fact that bodily injury has occurred in the commission or attempted commission of one of [the felonies which trigger the felony-murder rule] warrants the presumption that, as a matter of law, the perpetrator possessed the mens rea requisite to murder. ... [[Image here]] ... It does not follow that in purely arbitrary circumstances, the legislature intended to create a discretionary vehicle whereby the state could seek a conviction for attempted murder without an obligation to prove the intent to kill. 19”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“"When Anderson Police Detective David Levi referred to the 'anonymous tip, defendant objected to the testimony on the basis that it constituted hearsay. The ree-ord reveals, however, that Levi neither revealed the name of the informant nor the contents of the telephone conversation; consequently, the fact that an anonymous tip occurred was not hearsay. Defendant's objection would have been appropriate had the contents of the telephone conversation been admitted for the truth of the matters asserted therein."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"There can be no felony murder where there has been no death, and the felony murder ingredient of the offense of murder cannot be made the basis of an indictment charging attempted murder. Moreover, the offense of attempt requires an `intent to commit a specific offense', while the distinctive characteristic of felony murder is that it does not involve an intention to kill. There is no such criminal offense as an attempt to achieve an unintended result." (Citations omitted.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bell · Bruce v. State
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.