Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 895 NE2D 369 - Scott v. State

Scott v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 19 Cal. 4th 1138 - Hubbart v. Superior Court · 27 Cal. 4th 888 - People v. Superior Court (Ghilotti) · Commonwealth v. Boucher · Henley v. State · Coleman 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “mental abnormality or personality disorder”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “As an appellate tribunal, we neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses when an appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, but consider only the evidence most favorable to the State and all reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom. We review the evidence for the purpose of determining, as a matter of law, whether there is substantial evi-denee of probative value from which a jury could reasonably infer or find the existence of each material element of the crime in order to reach the conclusion that the accused has been proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Substantial evidence of probative value is evidence that has the qualities of directness and freedom from uncertainty.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “When a defendant makes a sufficiency-of-the-evidenee challenge to a trial court’s SVP finding, our inquiry is whether there was substantial evidence of probative value to support the trial court’s finding that the defendant suffers from a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes him or her likely to repeatedly commit the enumerated sex or violent offenses. [Scott v. State, 895 N.E.2d 369, 375-75 (Ind.Ct.App.2008) ]. We will neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of the witnesses. Id. at 374-75 . We consider only the evidence supporting the judgment and any reasonable inferences that can be drawn from such evidence. Id.”
    1 later decision 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.