226 W. Va. 464 - State v. Edmonds’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “any person who is acting in the place of a parent and charged with any of a parent’s rights, duties or responsibilities concerning a child or someone responsible for the general supervision of a child’s welfare, or any person who by virtue of their occupation or position is charged with any duty or responsibility for the health, education, welfare,' or supervision of the child. -”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 226 W. Va. 535 - State v. LONGERBEAM · SER Carl L. Harris, Prosecuting Attorney v. Hon. John W. Hatcher, Judge

2. “A criminal defendant challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction takes on a heavy burden. An appellate court must review all the evidence, whether direct or circumstantial, in the light most favorable to the prosecution and must credit all inferences and credibility assessments that the jury might have drawn in favor of the prosecution. The evidence need not be inconsistent with every conclusion save that of guilt so long as the jury can find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Credibility determinations are for a jury and not an appellate court. Finally, a jury verdict should be set aside only when the record contains no evidence, regardless of how it is weighed, from which the jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 226 W. Va. 535 - State v. LONGERBEAM

3. “person in a position of trust in relation to a child.” In 2005, the Legislature amended this statute to add this language, as well as amended West Virginia Code §61— 8D-1 to add subsection (12), 'which defines “a person in a position of trust in relation to a child.” See supra note 5, . We further observed that the trial judge read the definition of "person in a position of trust” to the jury and defense counsel had a full opportunity to argue his position to the jury that the defendant was not a "person in a position of trust” under this definition. We find that this issue was properly decided by the jury. The State presented sufficient evidence supporting the jury's conclusion that the defendant was a "person in a position of trust”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. SER Carl L. Harris, Prosecuting Attorney v. Hon. John W. Hatcher, Judge