Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 243 Ind. 560 - Weaver v. State

Weaver v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1963

Citation profile

72
cited by 72 later decisions
1
states following
October 1986
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 69 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently October 1986 · most notably Rowan v. State (1982), Greenwalt v. State (1965)

3 federal appellate · 69 state decisions

340196319701980decided

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 Parker v. State · Shipman v. State · Messel v. State · Williams v. State · Schuble 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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Although it is better practice, if possible to prove the venue by direct evidence, this cannot in all cases be done. It is not necessary that venue be proved by direct evidence established by questions and answers specifically naming the particular county and state in which the offense was alleged to have been committed. It is sufficient if facts and circumstances are shown by the evidence from which the jury may find where the crime was committed. Boyle v. State (1955), 234 Ind. 215 , 125 N.E.2d 707 ; Johnson v. State (1957), 236 Ind. 509 , 141 N.E.2d 444 ; Moore v. State (1913), 179 Ind. 353 , 101 N.E. 295 ; Williams v. State (1907), 168 Ind. 87 , 79 N.E. 1079 .””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““ ‘It is only when there is an absence of substantial evidence on an essential element of an alleged crime, or when the evidence is without conflict and leads to but one reasonable conclusion and the verdict of the jury reached a contrary conclusion, that the verdict will be disturbed as not being supported by sufficient evidence or as being contrary to law. Bowens v. State (1952), 231 Ind. 559 , 109 N. E. 2d 91 .’ Weaver v. State (1963), 243 Ind. 560 , 187 N. E. 2d 485, 488 .” 244 Ind. at 600, 194 N. E. 2d at 728 .”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"had taken a five year old girl between here and Linwood which we judicially know is in Madison County,"”
    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.