Blackburn v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
December 1998
most recently cited
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Sandstrom v. Montana · Francis v. Franklin · Yamanis v. United States · Good Hope Chemical Corp. Creditors' Committee v. Koerver
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“must determine whether the challenged portion of the instruction creates a mandatory presumption, or merely a permissive inference. A mandatory presumption instructs the jury that it must infer the presumed facts if the State proves certain predicate facts. A permissive inference suggests to the jury a possible conclusion to be drawn if the State proves predicate facts, but does not require the jury to draw that conclusion. Mandatory presumptions ... violate the Due Process Clause if they relieve the State of the burden of persuasion on an element of an offense. A permissive inference does not relieve the State of its burden of persuasion because it still requires the State to convince the jury that the suggested conclusion should be inferred based on the predicate facts proved.... A permissive inference violates the Due Process Clause only if the suggested conclusion is not one that reason and common sense justify in light of the proven facts before the jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Winegeart v. State“It is not necessary that an express intention be proved, it may be inferred. The law presumes that every man intends the legitimate consequences of his own acts. The intent may be presumed and inferred from the result of the action. It is not always possible to prove an intent by direct evidence for intent is a subjective fact. In determining intent, you may look to all the surrounding circumstances, bearing in mind the presumption inlaw, that everyone of sound mind is presumed to intend the natural results of his voluntary acts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Beecher v. State“is bound to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Holliday 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.