Taylor v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently September 2016
22 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 Zickefoose v. State · Spradlin v. State · Smith v. State · Hill v. State · Santana v. State
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Spradlin effectively overruled King v. State (1988), Ind., 517 N.E.2d 383 ; Worley v. State (1986), Ind., 501 N.E.2d 406 ; Santana, 486 N.E.2d 1010 ; and other prior cases contrary to Spradlin.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Simmons v. State · Arthur v. State“A person attempts to commit a crime when, acting with the culpability required for the commission of the crime, he engages in conduct that constitutes a substantial step toward commission of the crime. An attempt to commit a crime is a felony of the same class as the crime attempted.... To convict the Defendant the state must have proved each of the following elements: The Defendant 1. on or about August 20, 1998, knowingly 2. engaged in conduct, to-wit: repeatedly striking at and against the head and body of Kinsey Ledford with his hands and feet and then pulling a knife and attempting to stab the said Kinsey Ledford as he lay unconscious on the ground, with the intent to kill Kinsey Ledford. 3. that the conduct was a substantial step toward the commission of the crime of murder. If the State failed to prove each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the Defendant not guilty. (R. at 420-21) (emphasis added) (citations omitted).... Court's Final Instruction No. 2 Attempt, is a crime of specific intent, that is, it must be done with the intent to commit a [sic] alleged felony. You are instructed that where a specific intent must be proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, as in ATTEMPT, to make an act an offense, the State is not required to make proof of specific intent by direct evidence, for purpose and intent are subjective facts. That is, they exist within the mind of the person, and since you cannot delve into a person's mind and determine his purpose an”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Carter v. State · Greenlee v. State“There was in effect at the time of the alleged offense an Indiana Law, I.C. 35-42-1-1, which reads, in part, as follows: A person who knowingly or intentionally kills another human being commits murder. There was also in effect at the time of the alleged offense an Indiana Law, I.C. 35-41-5-1, which reads in part as follows: A person attempts to commit a crime when, acting with the culpability required for commission of the crime, he engages in conduct that constitutes a substantial step toward commission of the crime. Attempted Murder is a Class A Felony. To convict a defendant of Attempted Murder, as alleged in Count I, the State must prove each of the following elements: The defendant: 1. Knowingly or intentionally 2. Engaged in conduct that constituted a substantial step to accomplish 3. The knowing or intentional killing of another human being, to-wit: Charles Williams.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Greer v. State · Greenlee 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.