250 So. 2d 333 - Wright v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"... We are not prepared to say that the elements of the supporting felony under the felony-murder rule must be explained to the jury with the same particularity that would be required if burglary were the primary crime charged. Nevertheless, we do hold that they must be defined sufficiently to assure the accused a fair trial of the commission of the secondary crime as well as the primary one."”

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

2. “The District Court also held that, upon request in a felony murder prosecution, it is incumbent upon the trial court to charge the jury upon the specific ingredients making up each permissible felony under the evidence. While we agree with this as a proper statement of law, the District Court went beyond it in application.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 377 So. 2d 1163 - State v. Jones

3. “We are not here concerned with the premeditation feature. We are concerned only with the felony-murder feature.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 377 So. 2d 1163 - State v. Jones