227 W. Va. 492 - State v. Juntilla’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
February 2021
most recently cited
20 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Rhode Island v. Innis · 194 W. Va. 657 - State v. Guthrie · 194 W. Va. 3 - State v. Miller · 196 W. Va. 294 - State v. LaRock
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he function of an appellate court when reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction is to examine the evidence admitted at trial to determine whether such evidence, if believed, is sufficient to convince a reasonable person of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, the relevant inquiry is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favoi’able to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘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.’ Syl. Pt. 3, in part, State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657 , 461 S.E.2d 163 (1995).” Syl. Pt. 2, State v. Juntilla, 227 W.Va. 492 , 711 S.E.2d 562 (2011).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.