Jones v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The often repeated test for sufficiency of the evidence is, whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. This Court defers to the unique opportunity of the fact-finder to view the evidence and to observe firsthand the demeanor and to assess the credibility of witnesses. We further decline to second-guess any reasonable inferences drawn by the fact-finder or to reweigh the fact-finder’s resolution of conflicting evidence. If the evidence either showed directly, or circumstantially, or supported a rational inference of facts which could fairly convince a trier of fact of the defendant’s guilt of the offenses charged beyond a reasonable doubt, then we will affirm the conviction.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 217 Md. App. 676 - Jones v. State

2. “); Hubbert v. State, 759 So.2d 504, 508 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000) (”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State of West Virginia v. Rashaun R. Boyd and Christopher R. Wyche