Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 267 Ind. 654 - Rogers v. State

Rogers v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
4
states following
September 2011
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently September 2011 · most notably Newton v. State (1983), Van Bibber v. Norris (1980)

32 state decisions

24019781980199020002010decided

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 Lanzetta v. State New Jersey · Hardin v. State · Young v. State · Daniels v. State · Byassee 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"As to a defense, a defendant is generally required to put the defense in issue by some means himself, as, for example, by introducing evidence or by specially pleading." Rogers v. State, (1978) 267 Ind. 654, 658-59 , 373 N.E.2d 125, 127 (citations omitted).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “While mere presence at the scene of the crime is not itself sufficient to allow an inference of participation, such presence may be considered with other evidence in determining guilt. Thus the trier of fact may infer participation from appellant’s failure to oppose the crime, companionship with another engaged therein, and a course of conduct before and after the offense. In determining whether there is substantial evidence of probative value to support the verdict, each case must be reviewed on its own facts.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The defendant cites no Indiana cases and we find none in which it is stated that the prosecution is required to prove as an essential element of the offense of rape that the defendant is not the husband of the victim.... As to a defense, a defendant is generally required to put the defense in issue by some means himself, as, for example, by introducing evidence or by specially pleading.”) (citations omitted); State v. Bell, 90 N.M. 134 , 560 P.2d 925, 933 (1977)(”
    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.