Corrothers v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

28 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[i]f scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. James Douglas Willie v. State of Mississippi · 240 So. 3d 449 - Kevin Darnell Powell v. State of Mississippi

2. “I. In violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, trial counsel was ineffective for failing to perform an adequate pretrial investigation and present available mitigation evidence from petitioner's available family members and friends at sentencing, such that petitioner was denied a fair trial and sentencing free from any arbitrary factors as required by the Eighth Amendment. II. Petitioner was denied due process and a fair trial when the State presented identification testimony from a witness who could only provide an in-court identification of Mr. Corrothers. III. Mr. Corrothers is entitled to an evidentiary [hearing] based on recanted identification testimony. IV. In violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, petitioner's death sentence is unconstitutional because an execution will create a substantial risk of cruel and unusual punishment. V. In violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, trial counsel was ineffective for failing to perform an adequate pretrial investigation and present that petitioner has been institutionalized most of his adolescent life and adulthood, such that petitioner was denied a fair trial, and sentencing free from any arbitrary factors as required by the Eighth Amendment. VI. Counsel failed to reasonably ensure that jurors gave full effect to mitigating evidence. VII. In violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the prosecution's improper arguments during the capit”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Caleb Corrothers v. State of Mississippi

3. “I. WHETHER, HAVING EXPRESSLY ORDERED EVANS EVALUATED FOR COMPETENCY, THE TRIAL COURT REVERSIBLY ERRED BY FAILING TO HEAR AND ADJUDICATE THE QUESTION OF EVANS’S COMPETENCY. II. WHETHER THE JURY SELECTION PROCESS WAS CONSTITUTIONALLY , INFIRM AND REQUIRES REVERSAL.OF EVANS’S CONVICTION AND SENTENCE OF DEATH. III. WHETHER ISSUES WITH THE JURY, EXACERBATED BY ITS APPARENT INABILITY TO FOLLOW JUDICIAL INSTRUCTIONS, ALSO INFECTED THE TRIAL ITSELF WITH REVERSIBLE ERROR. IV. .WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT COMMITTED REVERSIBLE EVIDENTIARY ERROR AT BOTH PHASES OF THE PROCEEDINGS. V. WHETHER EVANS’S CONVICTION AND SENTENCE MUST BE REVERSED BECAUSE OF THE PROSECUTOR’S MISCONDUCT IN MAKING CONSTITUTIONALLY IMPROPER AND PREJUDICIALLY INFLAMMATORY CLOSING ARGUMENTS. VI. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT DEPRIVED EVANS OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AT THE CULPABILITY PHASE OF THE TRIAL BY REFUSING HIS REQUESTED MANSLAUGHTER INSTRUCTIONS AND GRANTING THE STATE’S REQUESTED INSTRUCTIONS ON “ONE CONTINUOUS TRANSACTION” AND VOLUNTARY INTOXICATION. VII. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT’S ERRONEOUS SENTENCING PHASE INSTRUCTIONS REQUIRE VACATION OF THE DEATH SENTENCE AND REMAND FOR A NEW SENTENCING HEARING. ■ VIII. WHETHER THE DEATH SENTENCE WAS IMPOSED IN VIOLATION. OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. IX. WHETHER THE DEATH SENTENCE IN THIS MATTER IS CONSTITUTIONALLY AND STATUTORILY DISPROPORTIONATE. X; WHETHER THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF THE ERRORS IN THE TRIAL COURT MANDATES REVERSAL OF THE VERDICT OF GUILT AND/OR THE SENTENCE”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Timothy Nelson Evans v. State of Mississippi