Hixson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 4 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “* * * The evidence is crystal clear that the representations and promises made by appellant to deliver the church directories, which was an intricate part of the entire project and was the sole motivating factor that induced the churches and the membership to participate in the project, were false as a matter of fact and as to the value of the articles that the churches and members were to receive in return for delivering their monies to the appellant. Moreover, it is plain from this record that appellant had no experience or expertise either in photography or in the compilation of church directories; and that at the time that appellant made the promises to deliver the directories, appellant did not possess the facilities to print a directory, nor had he made arrangements with any other firm or source for the preparation of the directories.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hixson v. Housewright

2. “We are persuaded that it was incumbent upon the State to establish the fob-lowing in order to convict the appellant-defendant of the charge brought under the above provisions: 1. That appellant-defendant, at the time he received the monies from the owners, did not intend to carry out his promise to deliver church directories to the churches and the membership thereof in return for the monies received by him. 2. That appellant-defendant knew, at the time he promised to deliver church directories to the churches and the mem bership thereof that the promise or representation was false and that the promise was made for the purpose of depriving the owners of their property.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hixson v. Housewright

3. “The Court has admitted testimony of other conduct similar to that charged in the information. You will not be permitted to convict the defendant upon such testimony. Evidence of other similar conduct, if you believe another offense has been proven, is admitted solely for the purpose of showing motive, design and particular criminal intent, habits and practices, guilty knowledge, good or bad faith, and you should consider such evidence for this purpose alone and it shall not be considered in fixing any punishment that might be imposed. The Defendant is not on trial for any offense except the alleged offense for which he is on trial.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hixson v. Housewright