State v. Ottwell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The necessity defense has also been characterized by situations in which the defendant faced a choice between two evils. In this type of case, defendants argued that they were justified in breaking the law to prevent a greater harm than the law was intended to cure. Thus, in one case, the defendants claimed necessity as a defense to charges of smuggling Laetrile into the United States to treat cancer patients. United States v. Richardson (9th Cir. 1978), 588 F.2d 1235, 1239 , cert. den. [(1979)] 440 U.S. 947 , 99 S.Ct. 1426 , 59 L.Ed.2d 636 . In another, a defendant who felt a moral obligation to fhistrate United States military efforts in Southeast Asia claimed necessity as a defense to charges of burning Selective Service System records. United States v. Simpson (9th Cir. 1972), 460 F.2d 515, 517-18 .”

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

2. “We conclude that the compulsion statute and necessity doctrine of [State v.] Strandberg [(1986), 223 Mont. 132 , 724 P.2d 710 ,] do not provide mutually exclusive defenses; they are complimentary. Strandberg is merely an application of the compulsion statute tailored to the circumstances of prison escapes. "When dealing with prison escapes, therefore, Strandberg provides the appropriate analysis.”

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

3. “A person is not guilty of an offense, other than an offense punishable with death, by reason of conduct which he performs under the compulsion of threat or menace of the imminent infliction of death or serious bodily harm if he reasonably believes that death or serious bodily harm will be inflicted upon him if he does not perform such conduct.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. City of Helena v. Lewis