State v. Biegenwald’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 69 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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The suggestion in the colloquy [between defense counsel and trial judge] that there is a "correct” answer to the open ended question “what are your views on the death penalty?” is most troubling. Although such an open-ended question is undeniably a proper jumping-off point for death qualification, the vapid response "it depends on the circumstances” in no way reduces the need for additional probing of a venireperson’s views on the appropriateness of the sentence of death. The purpose of voir dire is not to elicit from a potential juror the correct answer; it is to draw out the potential juror’s views, biases, and inclinations and to provide both counsel and the court the opportunity to assess the venire-person’s demeanor____ The court’s initial open-ended question and variations on the "it depends” response were too often followed by closed-ended, suggestive questions that, not surprisingly, elicited the obvious "correct” response.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Martini

2. “The creation of an impartial jury, through the process of voir dire, follows `no particular tests' and is `not chained to any ancient and artificial formulas.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Mejia

3. “[w]hen the reflection in such a mirror is not related directly to the circumstances of the crime, it has no place at trial.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Jackson