Marsh v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 45 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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “extremely contradictory and irreconcilable verdicts”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Williams v. State · Brady v. State

2. ““While the Flowers case has never been overruled, we note that this Court and the federal courts have consistently taken care to establish that verdicts are in fact not inconsistent.” * * * “ * * * While never having reversed a case on the basis of inconsistent verdicts, this Court has consistently evinced concern over the possibility of inconsistent verdicts when faced with the issue by establishing that the verdicts are in fact not necessarily inconsistent.” (citations omitted.)”

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

3. “Consistency in the verdict is not necessary. Each count in an indictment is regarded as if it was a separate indictment. If separate indictments had been presented against the defendant for possession and for maintenance of a nuisance, and had been separately tried, the same evidence being offered in support of each, an acquittal on one could not be pleaded as res judicata of the other.. Where the offenses are separately charged in the counts of a single indietment the same rule must hold.... That the verdict may have been the result of compromise, or of a mistake on the part of the jury, is possible. But verdicts cannot be upset by speculation or 1nqu1— ry into such matters.”

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