Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 512 SW2D 166 - State v. Drake

State v. Drake’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
3
states following
November 2015
most recently cited

15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently November 2015

15 state decisions

7019741980199020002010decided

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 Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · Carroll v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Brinegar v. United States

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

  1. ““If you do not find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt each and all of the following: “First, that on May 30,1974, defendant did wilfully, unlawfully, feloniously, acting with another, and burglariously, fore- ibly break and enter a dwelling house located at 2017 Bredell, Maplewood, Missouri, the property of Kevin Smith, and “Second, that on May 30, 1974, defendant did have the felonious and burglarious intent to steal, take and carry away certain goods, wares, merchandise or personal property of Kevin Smith, then and there kept or deposited at 2017 Bredell, “then you must find the defendant not guilty of burglary second degree.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The charge was not materially changed against defendant. The amendment was not an abuse of discretion, since the defendant was not precluded from asserting any defense he may have had prior to the amendment nor was there any prejudice of his substantial rights of prejudicial surprise.””
    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.