State v. Bird Head’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 district · 40 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “cause of challenge that a juror has read in the newspapers an account of the commission of a crime with which a prisoner is charged, if such juror shall state on oath that it is the belief of said person that he or she can render an impartial verdict according to the law and the evidence; and the court shall be satisfied as to the truth of such statement____”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Jacobs · State v. Phelps

2. “[T]here are two aspects to aggravating circumstance (l)(a), one of which may be proved by establishing prior convictions for “another murder or crime involving the use or threat of violence to the person” and the other of which may be proved by showing that the offender “has a substantial history of serious assaultive or terrorizing criminal activity,” irrespective of whether the offender was convicted for the conduct creating the history.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Ryan · 823 F. Supp. 1486 - Williams v. Clarke

3. “The evidence submitted to the sentencing court establishes that the defendant did not have, prior to the death of James Thimm, a prior conviction of another murder or a crime involving the use or threat of violence to the person. However, the facts surrounding the death of Luke Stice actually predated the death of James Thimm by approximately one month. Although, the first clause of this aggravating circumstance is not applicable, the Court feels that the second clause of the aggravating circumstance is applicable. The Court finds from the evidence that the following facts, which facts are not all inclusive, support the finding beyond a reasonable doubt that Michael W. Ryan had a substantial history of serious assaultive or terrorizing criminal activity: a) Michael W. Ryan either spanked and beat Luke Stice, or directed others to do this; b) Michael W. Ryan either administered cold showers to Luke and held him under cold water or directed that this be done to Luke; c) Michael W. Ryan directed others to sexually abuse Luke Stice; d) Michael W. Ryan used Luke Stice as an ashtray; e) Michael W. Ryan rolled Luke around in the snow without any clothes on or directed others to do this to Luke; f) Michael W. Ryan spit in the mouth of Luke Stice; g) Michael W. Ryan shot chickens in the presence of Luke Stice to create in him a fear of guns or directed that this be done to Luke; h) Michael W. Ryan terrorized Luke Stice by placing a gun in his mouth and also by shooting him in the arm;”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Ryan