State v. Hale’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

cited by 28 later decisions

states following

January 1997

most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently January 1997 · most notably State v. Wilkins (1974), State v. Rice (1997)

28 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 State v. Adams · State v. Roth · State v. Murphy · State v. Jones · State v. Brown

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

“‘It is well established that a conviction, even of the gravest offense, may be sustained by circumstantial evidence. (State v. Kennedy, 124 Kan. 119 , 257 Pac. 726 .) This court has even said that inferences drawn from admitted or well authenticated facts may be stronger and more convincing than the testimony of witnesses who, albeit unwittingly, may not have been telling the truth. (State v. Evans, 115 Kan. 538, 541 , 224 Pac. 492 .) This declaration accords with the concept, generally held, that circumstantial evidence may be more trustworthy than eyeball testimony. (30 Am. Jur. 2d Evidence, § 1091, pp. 249, 250.)” (p. 449.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. State v. Wilkins · State v. Harding
““. . . When the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence is considered on appeal, the question is not whether the evidence is incompatible with any reasonable hypothesis except guilt, as that question was for the jury. The appellate courts function is limited to ascertaining whether there was a basis in the evidence for a reasonable inference of guilt. . . .” (1. c. 818.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. State v. Morton

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.