5 Smith & H. 531 - Cavert v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1929
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently November 2002
16 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘No public policy is sound which, in the name of public justice, invades the home and takes therefrom the wife as a witness against the husband, or the husband against the wife, and by means of the evidence of one consigns the other to the gallows, the penitentiary, or the jail. An increased number of convictions might result from such a policy, but at a cost which the public could ill afford. The home is the sanctuary of our civilization, and the increased number of convictions would not compensate for the homes destroyed.’ “The foregoing decisions were rendered before the passage of Acts of 1915, chapter 161 [TCA § 40-2404], This act does not have the provision of chapter 200 of the Acts of 1879 (Shannon’s Code, §§ 5596 and 5597) [TCA § 24-103], that neither of them ‘shall testify as to any matter that occurred between them by virtue or in consequence of the marital relation.’ “So we must decide whether or not, since the passage of said act of 1915 [TCA § 40-2404], a husband or wife will be permitted, over objection, to testify in criminal cases in this state, as to any matter that occurred between them by virtue or in consequence of the marital relation, or as to any confidential communications between them. “ ‘All communications between husband and wife are presumed confidential and privileged until the contrary appears.’ Wigmore, Ev., § 2336, pp. 3260, 3264. ⅝ ⅝ ⅜ ⅜ ⅜ ‡ “. . . We are therefore of the opinion that, while chapter 161 of the Acts of 1915 [TCA § 40-2404] mad”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hurley · Burton v. State“does not require a strict, actual, immediate presence, such a presence as would make him an eye or ear witness of what occurs, for if the abettor, at the time of the commission of the crime, were assenting to it, and in a situation where he might render some aid to the perpetrator, ready to give it if necessary, according to an appointment or agreement with him for that purpose, he would, in the judgment of the law, be present and aiding in the commission of the crime....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* should not be confined to mere statements by one to the other, but embraces all knowledge upon the part of either obtained by reason of the marriage relation, and which, but for the confidence growing out of it, would not have been knoAvn.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hanvy 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.