green
Positive treatment
Issue: overt act requirementCA ↗
Issue: overt act requirementMI ↗
Issue: declared ruleAL ↗
3.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 1900 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1900
1963
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Steven Ralph Sassi
See United States v. Britton, 108 U.S. 199, 204-05 , 2 S.Ct. 531, 534 , 27 L.Ed. 698 (1883).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Jones
(People v. Zamora (1976) 18 Cal.3d 538, 549, fn. 8 [ 134 Cal.Rptr. 784 , 557 P.2d 75 ]; People v. Olson (1965) 232 Cal.App.2d 480, 490 [ 42 Cal.Rptr. 760 ]; see United States v. Britton (1883) 108 U.S. 199, 204-205 [ 27 L.Ed. 698, 699-700 , 2 S.Ct. 531 ].) The overt act also must be proved “in order to show that an indictable conspiracy exists,” in that “evil thoughts alone cannot constitute a criminal offense.” (Olson, supra, at p. 489 .) There are cases, however, which specify it is the agreement itself which constitutes a punishable conspiracy; the overt act merely establishes the l…
cited
Cited "see"
Louis Joseph Abbate, Michael Louis Falcone, Charles G. Perry and James Shelby v. United States
See United States v. Britton, 1883, 108 U.S. 199 , 2 S.Ct. 531 , 27 L.Ed. 698 ; United States v. Beck, 7 Cir., 1941, 118 F.2d 178 ; Eldredge v. United States, 10 Cir., 1932, 62 F.2d 449 . 8 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Anthony
See United States v. Britton, 108 U.S. 199, 204, 205 , 2 S.Ct. 531 , 27 L.Ed. 698 ; United States v. Manton, supra, Id.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Freeman v. United States
(2×)
See also United States v. Britton, 108 U.S. 199, 204, 205 , 2 S.Ct. 531 , 27 L.Ed. 698 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Horwitz v. United States
(2×)
See, also, United States v. Britton, 108 U. S. 199 , 2 S. Ct. 531 , 27 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah
v.
Martin
v.
Martin
199.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 1, 1882.
Published
MAYOR AND ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF SAVANNAH
v.
MARTIN.
April 2, 1883.
A. R. Lawton and W. H. Chisholm, for plaintiffs in error.
Geo. A. Mercer, for defendant in error.
MATTHEWS, J.
1
This case is identical in its circumstances with that of Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah v. Kelly, ante, 468.
2
Judgment affirmed.