Taylor v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

75 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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"An instruction in a criminal case is erroneous, as an invasion of the province of the jury, if it intimates an opinion of the credibility of a witness or the weight to be given to his testimony. Swanson v. State (1944), 222 Ind. 217 , 52 N.E.2d 616 ; Alder v. State (1958), 239 Ind. 68 , 154 N.E.2d 716 ."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tyrice J. Halliburton v. State of Indiana · Turner v. State

2. ““The law gives persons accused of crime the right to testify in their own behalf, but their credibility and the weight to be given to their testimony are matters exclusively for the jury. Therefore, in weighing the testimony of the defendant in this case, you have the right to take into consideration the manner of his testifying, the reasonableness or unreasonableness of his account of the transaction, and his interest in the result of the case, as affecting his credibility. You are not required to receive blindly the testimony of such accused person as true, neither are you at liberty to disregard his testimony, but you are to give it due consideration, and to determine whether or not his statements are true, and made in good faith, or only for the purpose of avoiding conviction. 222 Ind. at 218-219 , 52 N. E. 2d at 617 . Quoting from Fletcher v. State (1909), 2 Okl. Crim. 300, 101 P. 599 , 23 L.R.A.N.S., 581 , this court said: ‘We think that it is error for the court to single out any special witness, personally, and burden his testimony with any suggestions which might indicate to the jury that in the opinion of the court such witness was liable to testify falsely. Instructions as to the credibility of witnesses should be general and apply equally to all the witnesses for the state and defendant alike. Because a witness may be the defendant is no reason why he should be visited with condemnation upon the one hand, or clothed with sanctity upon the other. He is before the c”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hines v. State · Webb v. State

3. ““If her testimony were inherently improbable and uncorroborated, the court should direct a verdict for the defendant, . . .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 155 Ind. App. 689 - State v. Overmyer