State v. Gopher’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

35 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “`[a] defendant is entitled to instructions on lesser included offenses if any evidence exists in the record which would permit the jury to rationally find him guilty of a lesser offense and acquit him of a greater,' ...”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 35 Cal. 3d 510 - People v. Geiger · State v. Norgaard

2. “The “inherent relationship” test is a product of several United States Supreme Court cases culminating in Keeble v. United States (1973), 412 U.S. 205 , 93 S.Ct. 1993 , 36 L.Ed.2d 844 . In Keeble the Court held that "... the defendant is entitled to instructions on a lesser included offense, if evidence would permit the jury rationally to find him guilty of the lesser offense and acquit him of the greater.” 412 U.S. at 208 , 93 S.Ct. at 1995 . In other words, the test to be applied is, if the lesser offense is supported by the evidence and is “inherently related” to the greater offense, then the instruction should be given to the jury.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Beavers

3. “Finally, from the language of Ostwald , i.e., “[a] defendant is entitled to instructions on lesser included offenses if any evidence exists in the record which would permit the jury to rationally find him guilty of a lesser offense and acquit him of a greater,” 591 P.2d 651 , it is clear that the instruction on resisting arrest should have been presented to the jury.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Beavers