159 Ind. App. 92 - Woods v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Where one has taken the life of another human being, and thereafter contends that he did so in self-defense, he can only be successful in his contention if: (1) he acted without fault, (2) he was in a place where he had a right to be, and (3) he was in real danger of death or great bodily harm, or in such apparent danger as caused him in good faith to fear death or great bodily harm. Bullard v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 190 , 195 N.E.2d 856 , 197 N.E.2d 295 ; Hightire v. State (1966), 247 Ind. 164 , 213 N.E.2d 707 . The burden is upon the State to show that defendant does not meet one or more of these requirements. Dorak v. State (1915), 183 Ind. 622 , 109 N.E. 771 . Whether the State has borne its burden of showing that the homicidal act was not carried out in self-defense is a question of ultimate fact to be decided by the jury. Robinson v. State (1962), 243 Ind. 192 , 184 N.E.2d 16 . After the jury has made this determination in favor of the State and against the defendant, this Court, on appeal: `... has upon it a duty to consider, not to weigh, the evidence in the case for the purpose of determining whether there is any substantial evidence of probative value from which a jury reasonably could have inferred that the appellant was guilty of the offense charged'. Robinson v. State, supra, 243 Ind. at 197 , 184 N.E.2d at 18 . See also Easton v. State (1967) 248 Ind. 338 , 228 N.E.2d 6 ; Baker v. State (1956), 236 Ind. 55 , 138 N.E.2d 641 ."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 162 Ind. App. 316 - Woods v. State