State v. Hoyt’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

30 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““By definition, second-degree murder is an unintentional killing. The overt behavior which produces death must be characterized as conduct evincing a depraved mind. A ‘depraved mind’ has been defined in these terms: “ ‘The phrase “a depraved mind” as used in defining murder in the second degree carries the suggestion of an induced or self-created condition of mind, and is to be distinguished from a state of mind generally described as insanity or feeblemindedness resulting from some disease or defect existing from birth or eárly childhood.’ “The statutory definition of manslaughter which is relevant here is: ‘Whoever causes the death of another human being . . . without intent to kill and while in the heat of passion; . . .’ On its face, the statute treats manslaughter as an unintentional killing. “Thus, both manslaughter and second-degree murder assume that the killing was not purposive. The essential difference between the two degrees of homicide does not lie in the nature of the course of conduct, but rather in the state of mind with which the conduct is carried out. Criminal homicide constitutes manslaughter when' a homicide which would otherwise be second-degree murder is committed under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. The reasonableness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor’s situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 62 Wis. 2d 564 - Kasieta v. State

2. “Legislative gradings of homicides recognize that society places different estimates on the moral reprehensibility of the defendant's conduct in each type of homicide, and that variations in the defendant's character justify variations in the sentence. Distinctions between degrees of homicide on the basis of the state of mind of the defendant permit the trier of fact to make moral evaluations of the defendant's character and within general limits determine the proper punishment. . . . The only rational basis of placing a defendant in one category or another is to make some moral evaluation of his act of homicide.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 147 Wis. 2d 429 - State v. Spears

3. “The state of mind of the defendant at the time of the shooting is crucial because it bears upon an inference as to his total character and this in turn points to the different degrees of homicide of which he may have been guilty.”

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