Meadows v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

23 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"[IJt becomes the duty of an appellate court as a matter of law to decide whether the evidence was sufficient to induce a belief of the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in the minds of jurors of average reason and intelligence; and in resolving that question the court undoubtedly can pass on the credibility of the testimony to the extent of determining whether it was substantial in the sense above explained.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ruel v. State · Kimble v. State

2. ““Under the circumstances of this case, to uphold the conviction would be a return to the ancient wager of law, a consequence not to be desired. We must conclude that . . . the evidence is not ‘substantial and probative’ and does not meet this State’s minimal standards of persuasion. The interests of justice must reach at least this far in an appellate court.” Meadows v. State, supra, 252 Ind. at 64 , 238 N. E. 2d at 283 .”

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

3. ““This Court subsequently ruled in Wedmore v. State (1957), 237 Ind. 212 , 143 N. E. 2d 649 , that the Court had no legal authority for establishing such a specific medical examination as a means of proof. However, it was the psychiatric examination which was overruled and not the Court’s concern for the problem of sufficiency . . .” Meadows v. State (1968), 252 Ind. 1, 5 , 238 N. E. 2d 281, 282 .”

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