State v. D. Iverson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Rather, it only provided the jury with some guidance for resolving ** competing interpretations of circumstantial evidence. If the jury found that an interpretation of circumstantial evidence was reasonable, it could be considered in conjunction with any other evidence to determine whether the State met its burden to prove guilt of each offense beyond a reasonable doubt. It is the overall weight of the evidence, and not any particular inference from the evidence, that determines the jury's ultimate decision on guilt. The existence of alternative interpretations of circumstantial evidence does not mean that both interpretations are equally persuasive or weighty.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Neiss

2. “The State of Montana has the burden of proving the guilt of the Defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof of such a convincing character that a reasonable person would rely and act upon it in the most important of his or her own affairs. Beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean beyond any doubt or beyond a shadow of a doubt.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Neiss

3. “When circumstantial evidence is susceptible to two interpretations, one that supports guilt and the other that supports innocence, the jury determines which is most reasonable.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Neiss