Moseley v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1908
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently April 1985 · most notably State v. Waters (1983), Fondren, Alias Taylor v. State (1965)
2 federal appellate · 24 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The testimony for the state, which the jury manifestly believed, showed that the room broken into was occupied that night by 11 people, consisting of Mrs. Nicol, her husband, and nine children. The husband and some of the children occupied the bed, and she, with the others, were sleeping on the floor. The burglarious entrance was effected, and the appellant crept across the room, and went to where Mrs. Nicol lay, and pulled her foot. She screamed, and caught him by the collar, whereupon he took fright and ran out, jumping through the burglarized window. It was not shown that anything was stolen. It is unthinkable that the purpose of the burglar was to ravish the woman, and so the jury were left to conclude from all the facts what his purpose necessarily must have been. “We have examined some of the authorities referred to in the brief of the Assistant Attorney General for the state, and arrived at the conclusion that the verdict was warranted. State v. Fox, 80 Iowa 312 , 45 N. W. 874 , 20 Am. St. Rep. 425 ; Commonwealth v. Shedd, 140 Mass. 451 , 5 N. E. 254 ; Steadman v. State, 81 Ga. 736 , 8 S. E. 420 ; Franco v. State, 42 Tex. 276 ; Woodward v. State, 54 Ga. 106 ; 6 Cyc., 245, and notes; and notably State v. Worthen, 111 Iowa 267 , 82 N. W. 910 . In this last case, which is almost identically like the one before us, the court said: 'The defendant insists that, though the motive to enter Fort’s house cannot be justified, the intent to steal cannot be inferred from these fac”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Nichols v. State
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.