Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
142 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 144 later decisions — most recently October 2007 · most notably Swope v. State (1975), Pulliam v. State (1976)
142 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 United States v. Di Re · Dembowski v. State · Williams v. State · Lewis v. State · Valentine 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 144 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The statute does not state that the person robbed must be the actual owner of the property. It is sufficient for purposes of this element of the crime if the property be taken from the person of another. [Citation omitted]. It is clear from the cireumstances of this case that the [employee] was in lawful possession of the money as an agent of the owner and that his possession of the money was superior to that of the robber. Nothing more was necessary."”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““It is well recognized that the use of a toy gun, or the mere appearance that the defendant was in possession of a gun [or other weapon] will be sufficient to establish the ‘violence or by putting in fear’ element of robbery.” Jackson v. State (1971), 257 Ind. 477 , 275 N.E.2d 538, 540 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““In considering the first contention that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict, this court, upon review will not weigh the evidence nor determine the credibility of witnesses. Only the evidence most favorable to the State and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom will be considered. As long as there is substantial evidence of probative value sufficient to establish every material element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt the verdict will not be disturbed.””
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.