Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 253 Ind. 91 - Greentree v. State

Greentree v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
December 1975
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Torphy · Mattingly v. State · Gilley v. State · State v. Simpson · Pease 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The evidence most favorable to the State is that on May 31, 1966, at about 9:30 to 10:00 P.M., Sandra Kay Prewitt, Marilyn Faye Brewster, Robert ‘Speedy’ Glidden and Joe Weatherford went to a Wake-Up station where appellant was employed. Appellant left work at the Wake-Up station with these persons in Weatherford’s car. They drove to a tavern on Ohio Street where Glidden was dropped off. They then proceeded to drive around in the car, during which time appellant asked Sandra Prewitt if Weatherford had any money with him. She answered that he did have what looked to her to be a lot of money. With appellant driving Weatherford’s car and Prewitt in the front seat with him and Weatherford and Brewster in the rear seat, they drove to Ellenbergr Park for the purpose of ‘parking’ where they arrived about 11:30 P.M. to midnight. Sandra Prewitt testified that after they had parked for a short time appellant hit Weatherford in the side of the head with a hammer. Appellant then ordered Weatherford out of the car and demanded his money. Upon Weather-ford replying that he did not have any, appellant pulled a, knife with a six inch open blade and again struck Weather-ford with the hammer. The two girls, Prewitt and Brewster, searched Weather-ford’s pockets for the money, then Brewster discovered Weatherford’s billfold in the car. Appellant again hit Weatherford, who ran from the scene to a nearby residence where he asked the occupants to call the police. Prewitt, Brewster and appellant th”
    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.