State v. Nunez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The issue here is: could the trial court properly instruct the jury based on our statute, A.R.S. § 13-202(C), which allows the state to show negligence by showing some higher mental state, after the appellant was acquitted in a former trial of acting with those culpable mental states? We agree with appellant that it could not. Because appellant was acquitted of second-degree murder and manslaughter in his second trial, the jury in his third trial could only determine whether or not he was guilty of negligent homicide. Because of the previous acquittals, the only state of mind the jury could consider was negligence.”

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

2. “If a statute provides that criminal negligence suffices to establish an element of an offense, that element also is established if a person acts intentionally, knowingly or recklessly.”

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

3. “If acting negligently suffices to establish an element of the offense, that element is established if a person acts intentionally, knowingly or recklessly.”

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