State v. Ferrone’s Empirical Analysis
1921
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 5 district · 181 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 201 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2020 · most notably Spencer v. State of Texas a Bell (1967), State v. Williams (1987)
9 federal appellate · 5 district · 181 state decisions — followed in 18 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 People v. . Molineux · Williams v. United States · People v. . Sharp · People v. . Fielding · Brown v. Swineford
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 201 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The information should be divided into two parts. In the first the particular offense with which the accused is charged should be set forth, and this should be upon the first page of the information and signed by the prosecuting officer. In the second part former convictions should be alleged, and this should be upon the second page of the information, separable from the first page and signed by the prosecuting officer. The entire information should be read to the accused and his plea taken in the absence of the jurors. When the jury has been impaneled and sworn, the clerk should read to them only that part of the information which sets forth the crime for which the accused is to be tried. The trial should then proceed in every respect as if there were no allegations of former convictions, of which no mention should be made in the evidence, or in the remarks of counsel, or in the charge of the court. When the jury retire to consider their verdict, only the first page of the information, on which the crime charged is set out, should be given to them. If they return a verdict of guilty, the second part of the information, in which former convictions are alleged, should be read to them without reswearing them, and they should be charged to inquire on that issue."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“high public officer[s], representing the people of the State, who seek impartial justice for the guilty as much as for the innocent. In discharging [their] most important duties, [they] deserve and receive in peculiar degree the support of the court and the respect of the citizens of the county. By reason of [their] office, [they] usually exercise great influence upon jurors.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"It cannot be believed that an accused man would ever have a fair trial, resulting in a verdict not affected by prejudice or by considerations by which the jury should not be influenced, if during that trial allegations that he has twice before been convicted of state prison crimes have been read to the jury, and evidence of his former convictions has been placed before them. It is beyond question that knowledge of such facts must necessarily prejudice the minds of his triers against the accused, and cause him more serious injury than that which he would suffer from any improper remarks of the state's attorney."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Application of Igo
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.