Frasure v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

58 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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In the cases referred to the evidence by which the guilt was sought to be fastened upon the defendant was purely circumstantial, and in some of them there was evidence of a scuffle having taken place by which it might be inferred that the defendant and the murdered person may have been engaged in an encounter out of which the killing grew, and from this the court held that, under such circumstances, it was the duty of the trial court to give to the jury instructions upon all of the points which it was possible for it to find from the evidence to have existed. It will furthermore be noticed that the cases in which the rule contended for must be applied are those in which the testimony is entirely circumstantial and there are no eye-witnesses to the .commission of the crime. We can readily see that if the evidence is entirely circumstantial and only established the corpus delicto, and other circumstances from which it might be inferred that the defendant had some connection with the crime, he would be entitled to the instruction contended for out of due regard for human life and liberty.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sergent v. Commonwealth

2. ““No witness saw the killing, and it was said that therefore the homicide might have been excusable self-defense, manslaughter, or murder, and, as it was the province of the jury to ascertain to which category the killing belonged, it was the duty of the court to instruct on the law applicable to murder, manslaughter, and. self-defense in order to meet any state of fact the jury might find from the evidence to have existed.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. House v. Commonwealth

3. ““When no witness introduced on the trial saw the homicide committed, or saw the parties after they met on the occasion when -the killing occurred, the law applicable to murder, manslaughter, and self-defense should be given, in order to meet any state of fact the jury may find, from the circumstances in evidence to have existed.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sergent v. Commonwealth