State v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

25 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[J]uror affidavits “may be used to show juror misconduct based upon extraneous prejudicial information, outside influence, or a chance verdict,” but may not be used to show “the effect of the misconduct on the jury.” Keyes v. Amundson, 343 N.W.2d 78, 84-5 (N.D.1983). “Our decisions have consistently rejected jurors’ affidavits about the effect of internal deliberations.” Miller v. Breidenbach, 520 N.W.2d 869, 872 (N.D.1994). See also Kerzmann v. Rohweder, 321 N.W.2d 84 (N.D.1982); Grenz v. Werre, 129 N.W.2d 681 (N.D.1964). “It is improper for a court to consider juror affidavits for purposes of impeaching a verdict relative to the mental processes or reasoning of the jurors in arriving at a decision.” Mauch v. Manufacturers Sales & Serv., Inc., 345 N.W.2d 338, 343 (N.D.1984).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Weisz · State v. Kovalevich

2. “Clark argues: “This was an intentional shooting.... Unless Clark had some right to intentionally pull the trigger, he was guilty of murder.... He was either excused by reason of self defense or he was not....””

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

3. “A trial court abuses its discretion when it acts in an arbitrary or capricious manner or misapplies or misinterprets the law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rittenour v. Gibson