State v. Fiorello’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
4 district · 65 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently April 2004 · most notably State v. Jenks (1991), State v. Reyes (1967)
4 district · 65 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 Holland v. United States · Costello v. United States · Pauling v. McElroy · United States v. Calderon · LundBerg v. Bannan
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our courts have held that the validity of the denial of a motion to acquit at the end of the State's case is to be tested in the light of the evidence at that time without reference to any corroborative evidence introduced during the defendant's case. See State v. Fox, 12 N.J. Super. 132, 135 ( App. Div. 1951); State v. Pincus, 41 N.J. Super. 454, 458 ( App. Div. 1956); cf. State v. O'Shea, 28 N.J. Super. 374, 378 ( App. Div. 1953), affirmed, 16 N.J. 1 (1954). Although there are many cases elsewhere which have in effect reached a different result (see, e.g., United States v. Calderon, 348 U.S. 160, 164, 75 S.Ct. 186 , 99 L.Ed. 202, 207 (1954); United States v. Kenny, 236 F. 2 d 128, 131 (3 Cir. 1956), certiorari denied 352 U.S. 894 , 77 S.Ct. 133 , 1 L.Ed. 2 d 87 (1956); Annot., 17 A.L.R. 910 , 925 (1922)), we may, for present purposes, assume the validity of the holdings in our courts, although we hasten to point out that under them the State is admittedly entitled to the benefit of all of its favorable testimony and the favorable inferences which a jury might reasonably draw therefrom.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“to view the State's evidence in its entirety, giving the State the benefit of all of its favorable testimony as well as all of the favorable inferences which reasonably could be drawn therefrom.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“all of the circumstances not only must concur to indicate a defendant's guilt but they must also be inconsistent with any other rational conclusion”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.