State v. Rainey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

25 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[i]t is the task of the advocate, not the judge, to comment on inferences. * * * Inferences when used against the defendant [in a criminal case] should be left to argument without any instruction.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Nefstad · 290 Or. App. 851 - State v. Martin

2. “[t]he judge shall not instruct with respect to matters of fact, nor comment thereon”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 98 Or. App. 708 - State v. Caldwell · State v. Boots

3. “* * * When, on a motion for judgment of acquittal, an inferred fact is used to establish an element of the offense * * *, the jury may be left free to infer that fact only when two requirements are satisfied: (1) sufficient evidence has been offered of the existence of the fact(s) giving rise to the inference to allow a rational factfinder to find the underlying fact(s) beyond a reasonable doubt; and (2) a rational factfinder could find that the inferred fact follows more likely than not from the fact(s) giving rise to the inference. When, however, the inferred fact is the sole basis for finding the existence of an element of the crime, a third restraint comes into play. In order to meet the requirement of proof of each element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury must be convinced that the inferred fact follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the underlying fact(s).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 75 Or. App. 430 - State v. Conway