Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 646 S.W.2d 409 - State v. Clark

State v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
October 2008
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently October 2008

10 state decisions

60198319902000decided

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 Berger v. United States · Basista v. Weir · State v. Aubuchon · State v. Brown · State v. Castino

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

  1. “The theory of our statute abolishing the distinction between principals and accessories, § 556.170, is that every defendant who joins in the commission of a crime is liable, on his own, as a principal; but he is also entitled to be tried on his own without having his guilt prejudged by what has happened to his co-defendant. This statute has obviated the old rule under which it was proper and perhaps necessary to show the conviction of the principal before an accessory could be convicted.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Because the jury in [the first] trial handed down a general verdict of acquittal and no transcript of the proceedings was made, we cannot determine what issues were necessarily determined in that trial. Absent a record so showing, we do not find collateral estoppel applicable here. See Basista v. Weir , 340 F.2d 74 (3d Cir. 1965).”
    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.