Barnett v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “the mere unexplained possession of recently stolen property standing alone does not automatically support a conviction for [receiving stolen property]. Rather, such possession is to be considered along with the other evidence in a case, such as hoiv recent or distant in time was the possession from the moment the item was stolen, and what are the circumstances of the possession (say, possessing right next door as opposed to many miles away). In essence, the fact of possession and all the surrounding evidence about the possession must be assessed to determine whether any rational juror could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Curtis Daugherty v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

2. “If, after being arrested for one (1) crime, a person commits another crime: ... (2) while the person is released: (A) upon the person's own recognizance; ... the terms of imprisonment for the crimes shall be served consecutively, regardless of the order in which the crimes are tried and sentences are imposed.”

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

3. “Knowledge that the property is stolen may be established by circumstantial evidence; however, knowledge of the stolen character of the property may not be inferred solely from the unexplained possession of recently stolen property.”

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