Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
64 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably Hulett v. State (2014), Waits v. State (2007)
64 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 Jackson v. Virginia · United States v. Powell · Milanovich v. United States · Williams v. State · Farley 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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"`[W]here there are mutually exclusive convictions, it is insufficient for an appellate court merely to set aside the lesser verdict, because to do so is to speculate about what the jury might have done if properly instructed, and to usurp the functions of both the jury and the trial court.' (Footnote omitted) [ Dumas , 266 Ga. at 799 , 471 S.E.2d at 511 ]. Thus, where, as here, it was both legally and logically impossible to convict Jackson of both feloriy murder and involuntary manslaughter, we must reverse both mutually exclusive convictions and order a new trial."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Martinez v. State · Flores v. State“[v]erdicts are mutually exclusive "where a guilty verdict on one count logically excludes a finding of guilt on the other. [Cits.]' United States v. Powell , 469 U.S. 57 , 69 fn. 8.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“A review of the language of the indictment reveals that it was sufficient to charge Jackson with an assault based on either (a) (1) or (a) (2) in regard to the aggravated assault underlying the felony murder charge. There was sufficient evidence adduced to support a verdict based upon either subsection and the jury was charged accordingly. However, the verdict form returned by the jury did not specify which aggravated assault subsection served as the underlying felony for the felony murder conviction. Thus, we cannot conclusively state that the verdict rested exclusively on the subsection (a) (2) ground so as to eliminate the reasonable probability that the jury might have returned a mutually exclusive verdict by finding Jackson acted with both criminal intent and criminal negligence at the same time as to the same victim.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Flores v. State · Walker v. State
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.