Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 554 SW2D 92 - Dowdle v. Commonwealth

Dowdle v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
December 1992
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Elmendorf v. Commonwealth · Mouser v. Commonwealth · Durham v. Commonwealth

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

  1. ““It is our view that neither Alice Mills nor Helen Walls was an accomplice. The authorities cited by appellant and appel-lee teach that an accomplice is one who knowingly, voluntarily, and with common intent, unites with the principal in the perpetration of the crime, either by being present and joining in the criminal act, by aiding and abetting in its commission, or, if not present, by advising and encouraging the performance of the act. * * ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““(1) A person is guilty of an offense committed by another person when, with the intention of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense, [s]he: ... (b) Aids, counsels, or attempts to aid such other person in planning or committing the offense.””
    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.