Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 5 WYO 59 - McNeally v. State

McNeally v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1894

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
March 1954
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently March 1954

4 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

301894190019101920193019401950decided

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.

  1. ““While it is not clear that in this jurisdiction a conviction on the unsupported testimony of an accomplice may not be sustained, as there are authorities based upon the strongest of reasoning, that the jury may, if they please, act upon the evidence of an accomplice, notwithstanding the turpitude of his conduct, the general rule would prevail that it is the duty of the court to advise the jury not to convict upon such testimony alone and without corroboration.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The corroboration requisite to validate the testimony of an alleged accomplice should be-to the person of the accused. Any other corroboration would be delusive, since, if corroboration in matters not connecting the accused with the offense were enough, a party, who on the case against him would have no hope of an escape, could, by his mere oath, transfer to another the conviction hanging over himself.””
    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.