State v. Speedy’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently June 2004
2 federal appellate · 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.
Relationships
Relies on Pate v. Robinson · V. P. Serodino, Inc. v. United States · State v. Garrett · State v. Swinburne · Dean 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No statement made by the accused in the course of [a 552.030] examination and no information received by any physician or other person in the course thereof ... shall be admitted in evidence against the accused on the issue of whether he committed the act charged against him in any criminal proceeding.... The statement or information shall be admissible in evidence for or against him only on the issue of his mental condition, whether or not it would otherwise be deemed to be a privileged communication.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Absent a waiver, venue must “be proved because the accused, under the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, is guaranteed the right to a public trial by an impartial jury in the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” But, as held in numerous cases, including Eichelberger v. State, 524 S.W.2d 890 (Mo.App.1975), venue is not an integral part of a criminal offense and need not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt or by direct evidence, but it may be inferred from all the evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Southern“When an accused enters a plea of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect he waives his privilege under § 491.060 RSMo 1969 to exclude testimony of doctors who have examined him for that purpose, and he also waives his privilege against self-incrimination in some respects. State v. Swinburne, 324 S.W.2d 746 (Mo. banc 1959).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. McGautha
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.