Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 65 Idaho 210 - State v. Gilbert

State v. Gilbert’s Empirical Analysis

1943

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
May 2003
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2003 · most notably Herring v. New York (1975), United States v. Sawyer (1971)

2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions

1101943195019601970198019902000decided

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 83 Cal. App. 34 - People v. Tognola · State v. Marren · State v. Gillum · State v. Brill · 17 Ala. App. 577 - Kelly v. State

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

  1. ““ ‘An “accomplice” is a person concerned in the commission of a crime, whether he directly participates in the commission of the act constituting the offense or aids and abets in its commission, or, not being present, has advised or encouraged its commission.’ ” State v. Gilbert, 65 Idaho 210, at 215 , 142 P.2d 584, at 585 (1943).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““where the evidence of defendant’s guilt is satisfactory and is such as ordinarily produces moral certainty or conviction in an unprejudiced mind, and the result would not have been different had an error in the trial not been committed * * * »”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““In the absence of satisfactory explanation by appellant as to the fact and circumstance of possession, this raised a presumption that he committed the larceny.””
    2 later decisions 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.