568 So. 2d 841 - Bolden v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently February 2012
21 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 · Blockburger v. United States · Schmuck v. United States · 368 So. 2d 871 - Cumbo v. State · Skelton v. City of Birmingham
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) A person commits the crime of arson in' the second degree if he intentionally damages a building by starting Or maintaining a fire or causing an explosion.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““In reviewing a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, this court must view that evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution. The test to be applied is whether the jury might reasonably find that the evidence excluded every reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt; not whether such evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis but guilty, but whether a jury might reasonably so conclude. [[Image here]] “Guilt is not established by circumstantial evidence unless the facts relied on are such that it is the only conclusion fairly to be drawn from them. If all of the material circumstances in evidence point to guilt and exclude any reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt a conviction is warranted. “However, ‘it is not every hypothesis, but every reasonable hypothesis but that of guilt, that the circumstantial evidence must exclude.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCostlin v. State“only so much of the remainder of the statement or conversation . . . as relates to the subject-matter of the part brought out by the [appellant].”
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.