Mata v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he complete and correct standard a reviewing court must follow to conduct a Clewis factual sufficiency review of the elements of a criminal offense asks whether a neutral review of all the evidence, both for and against the finding, demonstrates that the proof of guilt is so obviously weak as to undermine confidence in the jury’s determination, or the proof of guilt, although adequate if taken alone, is greatly outweighed by contrary proof. Adoption of the complete standard allows us to remain true to one of the stated goals of Clewis , harmonization, when appropriate, of civil and criminal jurisprudence, and it recognizes the State’s burden at a criminal trial is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Roberson v. State · Weatherred v. State

2. “Given that the burden of proof at trial was beyond a reasonable doubt, does a review of all of the evidence, both for and against the finding, demonstrate that the verdict is clearly wrong and unjust.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Naasz v. State

3. “Even if the difference is semantical in civil cases, my view is that the difference is substantive in the criminal context because of the State's greater burden of proof at trial.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Johnson v. State