Bishop v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A motion for directed verdict or a JNOV tests the sufficiency of the evidence, and “the trial court must consider all of the evidence ... in the light most favorable to the State.” Credible evidence consistent with guilt must be taken as true. The State must be given the benefit of all favorable inferences that may reasonably be drawn from the evidence. If the facts and inferences so considered point in favor of the accused with sufficient force that reasonable men could not have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty, granting the request or motion is required. On the other hand, if there is substantial evidence opposed to the request or motion in which reasonable fairminded jurors in the exercise of impartial judgment might reach different conclusions, then the request or motion should be denied.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brown v. State · 802 So. 2d 157 - McCormick v. State

2. “While we recognize the clear holding in Robinson that it was reversible error for the trial court not to have given sua sponte a limiting instruction on the facts of that case, we do not read Robinson to pronounce a per se reversible error rule when the trial court fails to give sua sponte the required limiting instruction, nor do we read Robinson to exclude such error from the harmless error analysis. Thus, we look at the facts of our case to determine whether the failure to give the required limiting instruction is harmless error.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 846 So. 2d 260 - Gray v. State

3. “In determining whether a jury verdict is, against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, this Court must accept as true the evidence which supports the verdict and will reverse only when convinced that the circuit court has abused its discretion in failing to grant a new trial. Only in those cases where the verdict is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that to allow it to stand would sanction an unconscionable injustice will this Court disturb it on appeal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brown v. State