Russell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

44 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ * * * proof of guilty knowledge, like proof of intent, is rarely capable of establishment by direct evidence, [and, therefore] circumstantial evidence — independent facts from which an inference of the ultimate fact to be established may rationally be drawn in light of common experience — most often is the only manner of proof available. * * * ” Russell v. State, supra, 583 P.2d at 700 .”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tageant v. State · Hovee v. State

2. ““Whoever buys, receives, conceals or aids in the concealment of anything of value, which has been stolen, embezzled or obtained by false pretense, knowing the same to have been stolen, embezzled or obtained by false pretense, shall, if the goods are of the value of one hundred dollars ($100.00) or upwards, suffer the punishment prescribed for grand larceny, and if the goods are worth less than one hundred dollars ($100.00), shall suffer the punishment prescribed for petit larceny.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Tageant v. State · Ostrowski v. State

3. ““ * * * In determining whether there exists substantial evidence, either direct, circumstantial, or both, in support of the verdict, we must view the evidence presented in the light most favorable to the prosecution, leaving out of consideration any evidence in conflict therewith, while drawing all reasonable inferences possible therefrom. ***" Russell v. State, supra, 583 P.2d at 700 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tageant v. State · Murray v. State