State v. Anderton’s Empirical Analysis
1926
Citation profile
1 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently December 1999
1 district · 6 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 Smith v. State · People v. Shotwell · Cornell v. State · Commonwealth v. Lewis · People v. Garnett
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that the [prosecutor] may insert words in an information wholly unnecessary to the principal crime charged, and thereby charge another offense and insist upon a conviction for such offense, merely because it was included in the information.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Carruth“`a defendant charged with one crime cannot be convicted of another and different crime, unless the allegations necessary to constitute the greater crime charged... are also sufficient to constitute the lesser crime.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Carruth
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.