State v. Green’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently January 1982 · most notably State v. Arce (1971), State v. Fassler (1972)
39 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.
Relationships
Relies on State v. Bearden · State v. Tigue · State v. Milton · MacIas v. State · 30 Cal. App. 2d 251 - Smith v. Schumacker
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Defendant contends that the verdict of guilty against him was based solely on circumstantial evidence and was not inconsistent with every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. In addition, he contends that the verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence. The record supports defendant’s contention that the evidence against him was entirely circumstantial. He argues that if after an examination of all the reasonable inferences that can be drawn from the evidence an inference of innocence exists then his motion for a directed verdict should have been granted. We do not agree. We have consistently held in the past that because of the dangers that lurk in a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence an instruction must be given to the jury that ‘the evidence must not only be consistent with guilt but inconsistent with every reasonable hypothesis of innocence/ State v. Bearden, 99 Ariz. 1, 3 , 405 P.2d 885 ; State v. Tigue, 95 Ariz. 45, 47 , 386 P.2d 402 . However, in the Bearden case we noted that it was the function of the jury to decide what reasonable inferences could be drawn from the evidence. State v. Bearden, 99 Ariz. at 3 , 405 P.2d at 886 . * * * ” (Emphasis supplied.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"But if the defendant’s analysis were correct there would be no reason to have juries decide criminal cases in which the only evidence against the defendant is circumstantial, for the trial judge could determine at the close of the evidence whether there was any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” 439 P.2d at 484 .”
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.