Waldrip v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

84 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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The single purpose for voir dire is the ascertainment of the impartiality of jurors, their ability to treat the cause on the merits with objectivity and freedom from bias and prior inclination. Questions of a technical legal nature and questions that call for prejudgment are improper in a voir dire examination. Since there is often a fine line between asking potential jurors how they would decide the case and questions that merely seek to expose bias or prejudice, the scope of the voir dire examination, of necessity, must be left to the sound discretion of the trial court. After viewing the record, we conclude that the lengthy voir dire in this case was sufficient to ascertain the fairness and impartiality of the prospective jurors. We find no abuse of discretion by the trial court.”

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

2. “[a] prospective juror's inability to recite circumstances which might lead her to vote for a life sentence is not dispositive of her qualifications to serve as a juror.”

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

3. “That different juries hearing different evidence might arrive at different punishment [for co-defendants] does not establish a claim of disproportionality.”

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