Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 307 Or. 332 - State v. King

State v. King’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably State v. Walton (1991), State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009)

2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

1501989199020002010decided

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.

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

  1. “"In ruling on the sufficiency of the evidence in a criminal case, the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Harris, 288 Or 703, 721 , 609 P2d 798 (1980). It is not proper for us to hold that there is a reasonable doubt because of conflicts in the evidence. After a verdict of guilty, such conflicts must be treated as if they had been decided in the state's favor. After the conflicts have been so decided, we must take such decided facts together with those facts about which there is no conflict and determine whether the inferences that may be drawn from them are sufficient to allow the jury to find defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Our decision is not whether we believe defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but whether the evidence is sufficient for a jury so to find. State v. Krummacher, 269 Or 125, 137-38 , 523 P2d 1009 (1974)."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"(1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the first degree if the person violates ORS 164.395 and the person: "* * * * * "(c) Causes or attempts to cause serious physical injury to any person."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"(1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the third degree if in the course of committing or attempting to commit theft the person uses or threatens the immediate use of physical force upon another person with the intent of: "(a) Preventing or overcoming resistance to the taking of the property * * *[.]"”
    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.