Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 140 IND 354 - Deal v. State

Deal v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1895

Citation profile

177
cited by 177 later decisions
5
states following
June 2012
most recently cited

2 district · 175 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 177 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably Hinshaw v. State (1897), Kiefer v. State (1958)

2 district · 175 state decisions

3501895190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Anderson v. State · Toledo & Wabash Railway Co. v. Goddard · Fort Wayne, Jackson & Saginaw R. R. v. Husselman · Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati & Indianapolis Railway Co v. Wynant · Cincinnati, Hamilton & Indianapolis Railroad v. Madden

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 177 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The reason most frequently given ... for the rule that this court can not weigh the evidence ... is that the opportunities and means of the court and jury trying the cause are so vastly superior to those of this court, they being able to see the witnesses face to face, to observe their conduct, appearance and demeanor on the witness stand, and thus judging of their intelligence, fairness and candor and many other means of weighing evidence that this court can not have, that it is deemed safer to leave that duty to be performed exclusively by them.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The jury can no more invade the province of the court than the court can that of the jury. It is true, in criminal cases, the jury are not bound by the instructions of the court, as to the law, as in civil cases, but may determine it for themselves contrary to the views of the court. But the province of the court to instruct them as to the law is the same in both civil and criminal cases, the only difference being, as before observed, the jury are not bound by the court’s instructions in criminal as they are in civil cases.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"The court of last resort is supposed, by their learning and experience in the law, time, and opportunities of library and books, to be better prepared than the trial court to ascertain what the law is. But, on mere questions of fact, they are not supposed to be any better qualified than the jury and the trial court to ascertain what the facts are, if even the evidence were brought before them the same as before the trial court."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.