State v. Everage’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
May 2008
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Davidson · State v. McCoy · England v. State · State v. Kelley · State v. Bushman
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Instruction No. 6 If you do not find the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree, you must consider whether he is guilty of murder in the second degree. If you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that on or about May 29, 1998, in the City of Clay, State of Missouri, the defendant caused the death of Kathy Styles by strangling her, and Second, that defendant knew that his conduct was practically certain to cause the death of Kathy Styles, and Third, that defendant did not do so under the influence of sudden passion arising from adequate cause, then you will find the defendant guilty of murder in the second degree. However, unless you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt each and all of these propositions, you must find the defendant not guilty of that offense. As used in this instruction, the term sudden passion means passion directly caused by and arising out of provocation by Kathy Styles which passion arose at the time of the offense and was not solely the result of former provocation. The term adequate cause means cause that would reasonably produce a degree of passion in a person of ordinary temperament sufficient to substantially impair an ordinary person’s capacity for self-control.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Robertson“This record not only shows no prejudice by the jurors, it actually provides affirmative proof to the contrary. Panel members were repeatedly asked whether their observations and discussions about the defendant would affect their ability to impartially decide the case. None of the jurors gave an affirmative response to the questions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Everage v. State
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.