2002 UT App 434 - State v. Weisberg’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently October 2021
6 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 924
Relies on Bailey v. United States · State v. Bluff · State v. Colwell · Salt Lake City v. Lopez · State v. Lucero
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The standard for determining whether a trial court correctly granted or denied a motion for arrest of judgment is the same standard appellate courts apply in determining whether a jury verdict should be set aside for insufficient evidence. Under that standard a trial court may arrest a jury verdict when the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, is so inconclusive or so inherently improbable as to an element of the crime that reasonable minds must have entertained a reasonable doubt as to that element.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“'A challenge to a jury instruction as incorrectly stating the law presents a question of law, which we review for correctness”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Prawitt
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.