State v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

94 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 94 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “all the possible innocent explanations for his flight,” was not erroneous and “[t]he [trial] court was not required to enumerate all the possible innocent explanations offered by the defendant. The fact that the evidence might support an innocent explanation as well as an inference of a consciousness of guilt does not make an instruction on flight erroneous.”); Thomas v. State, 467 A.2d 954, 958 (Del.1983) (”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Thompson v. State · 1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 2545 - State v. Kelly, No. Cr152961 (May 14, 1997)

2. “[t]he fact that ambiguities or explanations may exist which tend to rebut an inference of guilt does not render evidence of flight inadmissible but simply constitutes a factor for the jury's consideration.... The probative value of evidence of flight depends upon all the facts and circumstances and is a question of fact for the jury.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Adams · 1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 2545 - State v. Kelly, No. Cr152961 (May 14, 1997)

3. “the probability of a jury inferring a predisposition to commit the crime with which the defendant stands charged is logically increased when the evidence [of prior misconduct] pertains to misconduct similar to that involved in the case on trial because such evidence creates inevitable pressure on lay jurors to believe that if [the defendant] did it before he probably did so this time.”

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