Stout v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1892
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently May 2002 · most notably Carter v. United States (1957), Urciolo v. State (1974)
9 federal appellate · 29 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.
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In the trial of capital cases, even, there are many occasions when in reason, and a proper regard to the needs of humanity, it may become necessary to allow a temporary separation of the jury, without necessarily breaking up the trial, and that even after the jury have retired to consider of their verdict, otherwise protracted trials could seldom be brought to a final conclusion. Of course, the separation should only be allowed when attended with those precautions and safeguards necessary to secure entire freedom from approach or external influence of any kind.” (Citations omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Of course, the separation should only bo allowed when attended with those precautions end safeguards necessary to secure entire freedom from approach or external influence of any kind. « “ But each case reals upon its own peculiar circmnstsmccs, and is within the sound discretion of the trial court, and is therefore not the subject of appellate review, except where it is affirmatively shown that the party has been prejudiced by the action of the court.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]f any person be feloniously stricken or poisoned in one county, and die of the same stroke or poison in another county ... the offender shall be tried in the court -within whose jurisdiction such county lies where the stroke or poison was given____”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.