State v. Dufour

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that “in general it is not necessary to prove the commission of a crime on the precise day, or even year, laid in the indictment, except where the time is a material ingredient of the offense”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Becker
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1984-07-13· cited 50×
• State v. Clark
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1921-04-08· cited 19×
• State v. Snyder
  New Mexico Supreme Court· 1924-06-23· cited 7×
• Grissom v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1931-10-28· cited 6×
• Pueblo v. Díaz
  Supreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1943-03-31· cited 6×
• Grisson v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1931-10-24· cited 3×
• State v. Fraser
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1967-08-18· cited 2×
• United States v. Goldstein
  D. Delaware· 1973-09-10· cited 2×
• People v. Díaz
  Supreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1943-03-31

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Sam
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1887-01-05· cited 18×
• State ex rel. Rinne v. Gerber
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1910-05-20· cited 17×
• Commonwealth v. Connors
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1874-10-22· cited 16×
• Commonwealth v. Dunster
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1887-10-19· cited 16×
• Brevaldo v. State
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1886-01-15· cited 15×
• State v. Reckards
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1874-09-08· cited 12×
• State v. Arnold
  Supreme Court of Iowa· 1896-05-15· cited 9×