State v. Renforth’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably State v. Roque (2006), State v. King (1988)
4 federal appellate · 32 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 In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Addington v. Texas · Linthicum v. Nationwide Life Insurance · Matter of Neville · State v. Henley
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The defendant in this case was not required to eliminate ambiguity from his proof or to instill certainty in the minds of the jurors. His lesser burden was to persuade the jury that his position on the psychiatric issue was highly probable.... In summary, a party who has the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence must persuade the jury that his or her claim is highly probable. This standard is more exacting than the standard of preponderance of the evidence, but less exacting than the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The clear and convincing standard is reserved for cases where substantial interests at stake require an extra measure of confidence [above a preponderance of the evidence] by the fact finders in the correctness of their judgment, though not to such degree as is required to convict of crime [beyond a reasonable doubt].”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“To be “clear and convincing,” the evidence should be “clear” in the sense that it is certain, plain to the understanding and unambiguous. It must also be “convincing” in the sense that it is so reasonable and persuasive as to cause you to believe it.”
2 later decisions 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.