State v. Sena’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

52 state decisions

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

1. “sufficient evidence was adduced to support the underlying charge. The test for sufficiency of the evidence is whether substantial evidence of either a direct or circumstantial nature exists to support a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt with respect to every element essential to a conviction. When considering the sufficiency of the evidence, [an appellate court] does not evaluate the evidence to determine whether some hypothesis could be designed which is consistent with a finding of innocence. Instead, [the reviewing courts] view the evidence as a whole and indulge all reasonable inferences in favor of the jury’s verdict while at the same time asking whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt[.]”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Mestas · State v. Johnson

2. “[W]e do not agree that the grooming evidence in the instant case needed an expert witness to explain to the jury how Defendant's behavior showed his sexual intent or his lack of mistake or accident. ... Lay persons are well-aware of what it means to act with a sexual intent, and therefore can identify behavior as exhibiting that trait without the aid of an expert witness.”). . Batton, 602 F.3d at 1202 (”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Morris v. State · State v. Galindo