State v. Morey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 32 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The theory upon which evidence of [violence] is admissible in cases of homicide, is that when the plea of self-defense is interposed, a danger which is apparently imminent is to be considered and treated as if it were actual, real, and imminent, and such apparent danger must necessarily appear more menacing when regarded with reference to the assailant's character for violence and brutality as well as his special animus to the accused. When, therefore, the evidence tends to show that the defendant acted under an honest apprehension of danger from some overt act of the deceased, he may put in evidence the ferocity, brutality, or vindictiveness of his assailant as tending to show that he had reasonable ground for such belief, and when the acts or intentions of the deceased in reference to the fatal encounter are equivocal or doubtful, such evidence becomes very important and material.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 131 Or. App. 429 - State v. Lunow

2. “<< * * * To constitute this crime, [murder in the first degree] it is essential that the deliberate and premeditated design to kill must precede the killing by some appreciable length of time, sufficient for reflection and consideration upon the matter, and the formation of a definite purpose to kill, and it matters not how short the time is if it is sufficient for that purpose. The rapidity of mental action is such that the formation of a design may not occupy more than a moment of time, and it is sufficient if it is formed and matured while the mind is in its normal state, and under the control of the slayer, however brief the space of time may be.””

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

3. “`When a homicide is committed under circumstances that it was doubtful whether the act was committed maliciously or from well-grounded apprehension of danger, it is proper that the jury should consider the fact that the deceased was turbulent, violent, and desperate in determining whether the accused had reasonable cause to apprehend great personal injury to himself, but the circumstances of the case must at least raise a doubt in regard to the question whether the prisoner acted in self-defense.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 131 Or. App. 429 - State v. Lunow