168 W. Va. 59 - State v. Keffer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Where the State’s instructions attempt to define reasonable doubt and such definitions are in substantial variance from customary reasonable doubt language so that the jury may well have convicted on a lesser standard of proof, such instructions will constitute reversible error.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 168 W. Va. 231 - State v. McCourt · 173 W. Va. 317 - State v. Peyatt

2. “"The Court instructs the jury that a reasonable doubt such as is contemplated in law is not a mere fanciful or imagined doubt, but is a fair and substantial doubt based on the evidence or lack of evidence in the case and one for which a man who entertains such doubt should be able to give a good and substantial reason arising from the evidence or a lack of evidence in the case" (Emphasis added)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 170 W. Va. 433 - State v. Boswell · 169 W. Va. 94 - State v. Helmick

3. ““The Court instructs the jury that to prove beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean that the State must make the proof by an eye witness or to a positive and absolute certainty. This measure of proof is not required in any case. If, from all the evidence, the jury only believe it is possible, or that it may be, or that perhaps the Defendant is not guilty, this degree of uncertainty alone would not amount to such a reasonable doubt as to entitle the Defendant to an acquittal. All that is required for a conviction is that the jury should believe from all the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant is guilty.” (Emphasis added). * * * “The Court instructs the jury that the accused is presumed to be innocent and that such presumption goes with him through all the stages of the trial until the State, upon which the burden of proof rests, has shown beyond a reasonable doubt, that the Defendant is guilty. A doubt engendered by sympathy or by a dislike to accept the responsibility of convicting the Defendant is not a reasonable doubt. The law does not require proof amounting to an absolute certainty, nor proof beyond all possibility of mistake. If, after having carefully and impartially heard and weighed all the evidence, you reach the conclusion that the Defendant is guilty with such degree of certainty that you would act upon the faith of it in your own most important and critical affairs, then the evidence is sufficient to warrant a verdict of guilty.” (Emphasis added”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 168 W. Va. 231 - State v. McCourt