Steele & Woods v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““. . . The mere presence of an accused at the time and place of the crime alleged is not sufficient to make such accused guilty. Schaffer v. State (1930), 202 Ind. 318 , 173 N. E. 229 . We do have, however, the fact that appellant Woods was not only present with appellant Steele, but have the additional circumstance that Woods engaged in the conflict from its inception, and actually did commit an assault and battery upon the companion of the decedent. During all the time Steele was assaulting the decedent with the baseball bat, appellant Woods was of great aid to Steele by actively engaging in the fight and assaulting the decedent’s companion. We believe the law to be clear when two' or more confederates engage in the commission of an unlawful act, one is criminally liable for the act of the other in the furtherance of their common objective. White v. State (1941), 219 Ind. 290 , 37 N. E. 2d 937 ; Liford v. State (1965), 247 Ind. 149 , 210 N. E. 2d 366 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rogers v. State