Rajnic v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]here several persons are acting together aggressively toward another, and, because of their acts or the acts of either of them, it reasonably appears to him that his life is in danger, or he is in danger of great bodily harm, he may slay any of such persons or all of them, if it reasonably appears to him to be necessary so to do to protect himself from death or great bodily harm.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Edwards v. United States · Katrell A. Henry v. United States

2. “Number one, that the Defendant was not the aggressor; Number two, that the Defendant actually believed that he was in immediate and imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm; that the Defendant actually believed he was in immediate and imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm; Number three, that the Defendant’s belief was reasonable; and Number four, that the Defendant used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend himself in light of the threatened or actual force. I will repeat that. That the Defendant used no more force than was reasonably necessary to defend himself in light of the threatened or actual force. And if you believe it applicable in this particular case, that the Defendant had a duty to retreat and did not do so. Along those lines, if you find this to be applicable, before using deadly force, the Defendant is required to make all reasonable effort to retreat. The Defendant does not have to retreat if the Defendant was in his home, or retreat was unsafe, or the avenue to retreat was unknown to the Defendant. If you find that the Defendant did not use deadly force, then the Defendant had no duty to retreat. Now, regarding those factors I just read to you, and these are the factors that must exist for complete self-defense to apply, in order to convict the Defendant of attempted murder, first or second degree, the State must prove that self-defense does not apply. Therefore, this means you are required to find the Defendant not guilty unl”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 134 Md. App. 152 - Marr v. State

3. “Although, in construing Gunther , the Court of Appeals in both Bennett and Crawford spoke of a right to arm in advance of an attack, we believe that the Court was merely using the term as “short-hand” and did not mean to suggest that such a broad right literally exists. As we explained in Medley v. State, 52 McLApp. 225, 234-35, 448 A.2d 363 , cert. denied, 294 Md. 544 (1982), Gunther must be read as recognizing no more than the principle expressed in the authorities cited in it — that one does not necessarily forfeit his privilege of self-defense because he has previously armed himself in anticipation of an attack. It does not support the existence of any such right to arm, either as a general affirmative right or as a defense to the violation of a statutory prohibition against possessing or carrying weapons in public. (Emphasis omitted). Thus, appellant’s first requested instruction — that under certain circumstances a defendant has a “right to arm himself in anticipation of an assault” — was technically incorrect and the trial court properly declined to give it.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 134 Md. App. 152 - Marr v. State