Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 223 A.2d 823 - State v. Trask

State v. Trask’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably State v. Doughty (1979), State v. O'Clair (1972)

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 26 state decisions

2401966197019801990200020102020decided

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 Hunt v. United States · State v. Holland · People v. Rogers · State v. Wright · State v. Dodge

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

  1. ““When the evidence tending to prove guilt is so defective or weak that a verdict based upon it cannot be sustained a verdict of acquittal should be directed.” State v. Miller, supra. See also, State v. Doak, 1960, 156 Me. 8 , 157 A.2d 873 . “The single question raised before this Court upon appeal from the denial of a motion for a new trial is whether in view of all the testimony, the jury was warranted in believing beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty as charged.” State v. Trask, 1966, Me., 223 A.2d 823 . See also, State v. Viles, Sr., 1965, 161 Me. 28 , 206 A.2d 539 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Proof beyond a reasonable doubt may rest upon the testimony of a single witness. [Citation omitted.] The testimony of a robbery victim, if it is positive and credible, when believed by the trier of facts, is sufficient of itself to warrant a conviction and no corroborative evidence is required. . . . ””
    1 later decision 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.