171 W. Va. 212 - State v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
68 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently May 2014 · most notably 173 W. Va. 43 - State v. Kopa (1983), Commonwealth v. Donovan (1985)
68 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 Milanovich v. United States · 50 Cal. 2d 245 - People v. Lyons · 161 W. Va. 517 - State v. Starkey · 161 W. Va. 530 - State v. Pratt · State v. Anderson
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An instruction to the jury is proper if it is a correct statement of the law and if sufficient evidence has been offered at trial to support it.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““The essential elements of the offense created by [W.Va.Code, 61-3-18 [1931]] are: (1) The property must have been previously stolen by some person other than the defendant; (2) the accused must have bought or received the property from another person or must have aided in concealing it; (3) he must have known, or had reason to believe, when he bought or received or aided in concealing the property, that it had been stolen; and (4) he must have bought or received or aided in concealing the property with a dishonest purpose.” State v. McGraw, 140 W.Va. 547, 550 , 85 S.E.2d 849, 852 (1955).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““In a criminal case, a verdict of guilt will not be set aside on the ground that it is contrary to the evidence, where the state’s evidence is sufficient to convince impartial minds of the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence is to be viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution. To warrant interference with a verdict of guilt on the ground of insufficiency of evidence, the court must be convinced that the evidence was manifestly inadequate and that consequent injustice has been done.””
3 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.