Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 50 FLA 86 - Hogan v. State

Hogan v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1905

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
7
states following
September 1983
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently September 1983

19 state decisions

50190519101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 State v. Wilson · Hicks v. Commonwealth · State v. Frazier · Cunningham v. Commonwealth · Thompson v. People

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

  1. ““According to Mr. Bishop this is but the terms of the common law, and seems to require no change from the common law indictment, but as the act done must be such as the law recognizes as adequate and because the accused is always entitled to have the particulars of the accusation stated to him, such act must be specifically averred. While not necessary to allege failure in the attempt, it is necessary to set out both the intent and the act. 2 Bish. New Crim. Proc. 86. ‘In indictments for attempts the laxity permitted in assaults will not be maintained * * * But “attempts” is a term peculiarly indefinite. It has no prescribed legal meaning. It relates from its nature to an unconsummated offence. It covers acts some of which are indictable and some of which are not. * * * At common law such facts must be set forth as show that the attempt is criminal in itself * * * in an, indictment for an attempt to commit a crime, it is essential to aver that the defendant did some act, which directed by a particular intent, to be averred, would have apparently resulted in the ordinary and likely course of things in a particular crime.’ 1 Whart. Cr. Law (10 Ed.) 190, 192. “Indictments for attempts to commit crimes must aver the intent and the overt act constituting the attempt. 3 Ency. PI. & Pr. 98.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““State v. Frazier, 53 Kan. 87 , 36 Pac. R. 58; State v. Russell, 64 Kan. 798 , 68 Pac. R. 615; Cunningham v. Commonwealth, 88 Va. 37 , 13 So. E. R. 309; Commonwealth v. Clark, 6 Gratt 675; Hicks v. Commonwealth, 86 Va. 223 , 9 So. E. R. 1024; Thompson v. People, 96 Ill. 158 ; Kinningham v. State, 119 Ind. 332 , N. E. R. 911; State v. Wilson, 30 Conn. 500 ; Randolph v. Commonwealth, 6 S. & R. (Pa.) 398; State v. Colvin, 90 N. C. 717 ; United States v. Ulrici, 3 Dill. 532 .””
    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.