State v. Carney’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Because time is not an essential element of the erime, 'the state is not confined in its evidence to the precise date stated in the information, but may prove the offense to have been committed on any day before the date of the information and within the period of limitation'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Cleary · State v. Bunch

2. “INSTRUCTION NO. 6 As to Count I, if you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that on or about 2 March 2005, in the County of Crawford, State of Missouri, the defendant took money and cigarettes, which was property owned by Delano Convenience Store, and Second, that defendant did so for the purpose of withholding it from the owner permanently, and Third, that defendant in doing so used physical force or threatened the immediate use of physical force on or against Diann Melton for the purpose of preventing resistance to the taking of the property, or forcing Diann Melton to deliver up the property, and Fourth, that in the course of taking the property, the defendant was armed with a deadly weapon, or displayed or threatened the use of what appeared to be a deadly weapon, then you will find the defendant guilty under Count I of robbery in the first degree. However, unless you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt each and all of these propositions, you must find the defendant not guilty of that offense.”

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

3. “To show that a trial court committed plain error in submitting a jury instruction, a defendant must demonstrate more than mere prejudice. “In the context of instructional error, plain error results when the trial court has so misdirected or failed to instruct the jury that it is apparent to the appellate court that the instructional error affected the jury’s verdict.” Consequently, we seldom conclude that an erroneous instruction caused plain error.”

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