Baker v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1956
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 252 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 258 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably Vernon Fire & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Sharp (1976), Gaddis v. State (1969)
6 federal appellate · 252 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. Gregory · Wright v. Commonwealth · Christen v. State · Osbon v. State · Bradley v. State
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 258 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"... The rule of law defining proof beyond a reasonable doubt has been well settled for many years and requires each juror to be so convinced by the evidence that as a prudent man he would feel safe to act upon such conviction in matters of the highest concern and importance to his own dearest and most important interests, under circumstances where there was no compulsion or coercion upon him to act at all. Chambers v. State (1953), 232 Ind. 349, 356 , 111 N.E.2d 816 ; Morgan v. State (1921), 190 Ind. 411 , 130 N.E. 528 ; Bradley v. State (1870), 31 Ind. 492 . .. ."”
26 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Seats v. State · Corson v. State“(1) To prove an essential allegation beyond a reasonable doubt requires more evidence than to prove an allegation by a preponderance of the evidence. (2) When there is a reasonable doubt whether defendant’s guilt is satisfactorily shown, he must be acquitted. (3) Substantial evidence means more than seeming or imaginary. (4) The scintilla of evidence rule does not obtain in this jurisdiction. (5) Mere suspicion of guilt or opportunity to commit the crime are insufficient to support a conviction.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““We have carefully read and reread the entire bill of exceptions in this cause, since this conviction can only be sustained by holding the dubious testimony of Mary Kriech as to the identity of the appellant, uncorrorborated as to any material essential, and contradicted by unimpeached evidence of an alibi, was sufficient to prove the appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offense charged.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hallums v. State
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.