State v. Johns’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

57 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[a] defendant in a criminal action is entitled to have [the defendant’s] legal theory of the ease submitted to the jury under proper instructions. However, refusal of defendant’s requested instructions allegedly dealing with [the defendant’s] defense theory is not error where the proposed statement is either erroneous in its statement of the law, is not supported by the evidence or constitutes an impermissible comment on the evidence, or is adequately covered by other instructions given by the court.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Dambrell · State v. Varie

2. “The Terry rationale has been adopted in Idaho. Under Terry and under Idaho law, limited stops can be made for investigative purposes and to enhance the safety of the police officer who is conducting an investigation. If the officer’s suspicions are confirmed or further aroused, the stop may be prolonged and the scope of the investigative stop enlarged. The standard of proof which a state must satisfy in order to justify an investigatory stop is to be judged by a “totality of the circumstances.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jones · Tarango Deforest Padilla v. State

3. “The statements and testimony at trial of both Julie Halverston and the defendant Johns clearly establish that the murder of Price was because of an ongoing longstanding hatred of Price by Johns____ It was only after Price had been mortally shot and stabbed, and after Johns had dragged him off to a hiding place in the sagebrush, that Johns, as an afterthought, determined to take Price’s wallet and his Harley motorcycle. Upon returning to Kuna, Johns additionally entered Price’s apartment and took more of his personal belongings. The trial court was amply justified in sentencing Johns upon the premise that the acts of murder and robbery were divisible, rather than indivisible.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Cheatham