Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 817 SE2D 682 - Mangram v. State

Mangram v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2018

Citation profile

1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Romer v. State · Culpepper v. State · Coleman v. State · Crawford 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Corroborating evidence may be slight ... and may be entirely circumstantial. ... Once the State has introduced independent evidence implicating the defendant, it is for the jury to decide whether the accomplice's testimony has been sufficiently corroborated.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[E]vidence of the defendant's conduct before and after the crime was committed may give rise to an inference that he participated in the crime.”
    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.