Drake v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[I]nasmuch as the jury is not . .. charged with the responsibility of assessing the penalty upon a verdict of guilty, it would be improper for it to be instructed concerning potential sentences. ‘Such an advisement can only invite the jurors to be influenced by their independent judgment of the fairness of the statute — a matter dehors their task — in making their determination.’ Garcia v. State, (1979) Ind., 394 N.E.2d 106, 111 . In Beavers v. State, (1957) 236 Ind. 549 , 141 N.E.2d 118 , we held that although our Constitution grants to juries the right to determine the law, it is to do so under the guidance of the trial judge. Hence, the jury’s right to determine the law is not without limitation. We agree ... that the penalty provided by an offense is a part of the law. Nevertheless, if the jury cannot alter the penalty provided, and clearly it cannot, no valid purpose could be served by its disclosure. Whether or not the jury approves of the penalty provided has no bearing upon the defendant’s guilt or innocence. ..."”

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