State v. Bailey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 91 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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““If a defendant is charged with murder in the first degree, the county or district attorney shall file written notice if such attorney intends, upon conviction or adjudication of guilt of the defendant, to request a separate sentencing proceeding to determine whether the defendant should be required to serve a mandatory term of imprisonment of 40 years. Such notice shall be filed with the court and served on the defendant or the defendant’s attorney at the time of arraignment. If such notice is not filed and served as required by this subsection, the county or district attorney may not request such a sentencing proceeding and the defendant, if convicted of murder in the first degree, shall be sentenced as otherwise provided by law, and no mandatory term of imprisonment shall be imposed hereunder.””

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

2. ““An especially heinous, atrocious or cruel homicide is one which is accompanied by such additional acts as to set the premeditated murder apart from the norm of premeditated murders. “In determining whether the State has met its burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the alleged aggravating circumstance, you are instructed that the following words have the following meanings: ‘Especially’ means exceptional. ‘Heinous’ means extremely wicked or shockingly evil. ‘Atrocious’ means outrageously wicked and vile. ‘Cruel’ means designed to inflict a high degree of pain; or utter indifference to, or enjoyment of, the suffering of others; or pitiless.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Phillips · State v. Alford

3. ““When the sufficiency of the evidence is challenged, the standard of review on appeal is whether, after review of all the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the appellate court is convinced that a rational factfinder could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 18 Kan. App. 2d 772 - State v. Rowray · State v. Young