State v. Lutz’s Empirical Analysis
1919
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2009 · most notably Carroll v. United States (1925), People v. Marshall (1968)
2 federal appellate · 46 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Watson v. State · Honesty v. Commonwealth · 64 W. Va. 625 - State v. Clark · State v. Waldron · State v. Donahue
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘ ‘ One of the vices of instruction number thirteen is that it is inapplicable to the facts proven; am other is that in its broad terms it tells the jury an arrest without a warrant, may be made in case of misdemeanor committed in the presence of the officer. The instruction is -inapplicable to the facts, because there is no evidence that any offense was committed by the prisoner in the presence of the officer. The evidence is that the prisoner was standing on the street offending no one, when the officer approached, placed his hands upon him and felt of his pockets, and inquired of him what he had on him, and was then told by the prisoner that he had three pints. Whereupon the officer put his hand on his left arm and said: 'Come with me’. Nothing was said or inquired about a pistol, and it does not appear that the officer had seen either liquor or pistol when he made the arrest.””
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.