Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 62 Idaho 656 - State v. Phillips

State v. Phillips’s Empirical Analysis

1941

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
October 1990
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently October 1990

4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

30194119501960197019801990decided

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 People v. Beggs · In re SHERIN · State v. Bruce · Wilbur v. Blanchard

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

  1. ““Our statute and California’s statute (Sections 518 and 519, Penal Code) are the same. In construing the California statute the Supreme Court of that state, in People v. Beggs, 178 Cal. 79 , 172 P. 152, 154 , where this identical question was presented, said: “ ‘It is the means employed which the law denounces, and, though the purpose may be to collect a just indebtedness arising from and created by the criminal act for which the threat is to prosecute the wrongdoer, it is nevertheless within the statutory inhibition. The law does not contemplate the use of criminal process as a means of collecting a debt. To invoke such process for the purpose named is, as held by all authorities, contrary to public policy. Hence good faith, or the fact that the end accomplished by such means is rightful, cannot avail one as a defense in such prosecution, any more than such facts would constitute a defense where one compels payment of a just debt by the threat to do an unlawful injury to the person of his debtor.’”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “A person whose property has been stolen cannot claim the right to punish the thief himself without process of law, and to make him compensate him for the loss of his property by maliciously threatening to accuse him of the offense, or to do an injury to his person or property, with intent to extort property from him.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “has no reference whatever to the question of the justness of the ultimate result sought, but relates solely to the methods used to obtain such results.” In re Sherin, 27 S.D. 232 , 130 N.W. 761 (1911). Thus,”
    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.