Herron v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
August 2010
most recently cited
12 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Ring v. Arizona · Stephenson v. State · Kien v. State · Harris v. State · Garland 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[alpplication of this rule is rare; the standard to be applied is whether the testimony is so incredibly dubious or inherently improbable that no reasonable person could believe it. The testimony of an accomplice is subject to high serutiny. However, such testimony is by itself sufficient to sustain a conviction. The fact that the accomplice may not be completely trustworthy goes to the weight and credibility of his testimony, something that is completely within the province of the jury and cannot be reviewed on appeal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Moore v. State · Devries v. State“(Id. at 277.) DISCUSSION AND DECISION 1. Sufficiency of Evidence In reviewing sufficiency of the evidence, we will affirm a conviction if, considering only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the verdict, and without weighing evidence or assessing witness credibility, a reasonable trier of fact could conclude the defendant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Herron v. State, 808 N.E.2d 172, 176 (Ind.Ct.App.2004), trans. denied 822 N.E.2d 968 (Ind.2004). DeVries contends L.R.'s testimony is incredibly dubious and not corroborated by other evidence. The”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Devries v. State“), trans. denied. 3. Imappropriate Sentence Townsend asserts that his sentence is inappropriate. We may revise a sentence if it is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender. Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B). It is the defendant's burden to”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Townsend 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.