State v. Raguseo’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

128 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 128 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Now, what is meant by extreme emotional disturbance? Extreme emotional disturbance is the emotional state of an individual who is exposed to extremely unusual and overwhelming stress and has an extreme emotional reaction to it as a result of which there is a loss of self-control and reason is overborne by intense feelings such as passion, anger, distress, grief or other similar emotions. Extreme emotional disturbance is composed of three elements which must be proved by the defendant by the preponderance of the evidence. “First, that at the time the defendant intentionally caused the death of Leshea Pouncey, he acted under the influence of an emotional disturbance. “And, second, that such emotional disturbance was extreme. “And, third, that under all of the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be, there was a reasonable explanation or excuse for such extreme emotional disturbance influencing his conduct. It is for you to decide to what extent, if any, the defendant’s emotions did govern his conduct at the time he intentionally caused the death of Leshea Pouncey. “In reaching that decision, you may consider all of the emotion which you find, in fact influenced the defendant’s conduct. For example, passion, anger, distress, grief, resentment, fright, hatred or other emotions. “While the emotional disturbance need not necessarily have been a spontaneous or sudden occurrence and, indeed, may have simmered in the defen dant's mind for a long period of time, the disturb”

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

2. ““In an appropriate case the judicial authority may, upon motion of the prosecuting authority, order the defendant to submit to a psychiatric examination by a psychiatrist designated for this purpose in the order of the court. No statement made by the defendant in the course of any examination . . . whether the examination shall be with or without the consent of the defendant, shall be admitted in evidence against the defendant on the issue of guilt in any criminal proceeding. A copy of the report of the psychiatric examination shall be furnished to the defendant within a reasonable time after the examination.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Joyner

3. “because there was nothing inherently prejudicial about the defendant's alcohol consumption,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 5740 - Pierce v. Fales, No. Cv-99-0088423 S (May 3, 2002)