State v. Stallings’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 210 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 219 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably State v. Issa (2001), State v. Hancock (2006)
5 federal appellate · 210 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 Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · State v. Thompkins · State v. Jenks · State v. Bradley
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 219 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“whether, after reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“whether the evidence produced attains the high degree of probative force and certainty required of a criminal conviction.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“Intent need not be proven by direct testimony. State v. Lott (1990), 51 Ohio St.3d 160 , 168 , 555 N.E.2d 293 , 302 . Instead, intent to kill `may be deduced from all the surrounding circumstances, including the instrument used to produce death, its tendency to destroy life if designed for that purpose, and the manner of inflicting a fatal wound.' State v. Robinson (1954), 161 Ohio St. 213 , 53 O.O. 96 , 118 N.E.2d 517 , at paragraph five of the syllabus; State v. Eley (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 174 , 180 , 672 N.E.2d 640 , 648”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.