Smith v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• jury may infer that “the acts of a person of sound mind and discretion are the product of that person’s will” and that “[a] person of sound mind and discretion intends the natural and probable consequences of those acts”
• discussing sleepwalking defense to criminal offense

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Scott
  Tennessee Supreme Court· 2009-01-28· cited 106×
• State v. Ireland (Slip Opinion)
  Ohio Supreme Court· 2018-11-08· cited 31×
• Patterson v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2016-07-14· cited 26×
• Smith v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2013-03-18· cited 25×
• Axelburg v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 2008-10-31· cited 16×
• Palmer v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2016-07-01· cited 7×
• United States v. Lopez-Ortiz
  First Circuit· 2017-11-08

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Jackson v. Virginia
  Supreme Court· 1979-10-01· cited 79,490×
• Carter v. United States
  Supreme Court· 2000-06-12· cited 463×
• State v. Hinkle
  West Virginia Supreme Court· 1996-10-31· cited 144×
• Lewis v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1943-10-07· cited 80×
• Flynn v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1986-02-13· cited 48×
• State v. Massey
  Supreme Court of Kansas· 1987-12-11· cited 47×
• Paul v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2001-11-28· cited 40×
• McClain v. State
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1997-03-24· cited 34×
• Rivera v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 2007-06-25· cited 33×
• Fulcher v. State
  Wyoming Supreme Court· 1981-08-26· cited 24×
• Parker v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1986-10-29· cited 13×