Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 77 ND 860 - State v. Pusch

State v. Pusch’s Empirical Analysis

1950

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
12
states following
August 1998
most recently cited

33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently August 1998 · most notably 31 Cal. 3d 18 - People v. Shirley (1982), Reed v. State (1978)

33 state decisions — followed in 12 states

14019501960197019801990decided

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

  1. ““2. Testimony that tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense charged only when supplemented by certain testimony of the accomplice is not such corroborating testimony as the statute requires.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““4. Corroboration may be furnished by evidence of facts and circumstances which tend to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime. It is not necessary that the corroborating evidence shall cover every material fact testified to by the accomplice, or be sufficient, in itself, to warrant a conviction or to establish a prima facie case. It is sufficient if it corroborates the accomplice as to some material fact, or facts, and tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense charged. “5. The weight to be given corroborating evidence is a matter for the jury. A motion for a new trial on grounds of insufficiency of the evidence is addressed to the trial court’s sound discretion. Such court’s discretion with respect to the sufficiency of the evidence will not be disturbed on appeal unless an abuse of discretion is shown.””
    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.