State v. Frye’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 3 district · 218 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 225 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The required evidence is that which is minimally necessary to secure a conviction for each ... offense. If each offense requires proof of a fact which the other does not, or in other words, if each offense contains an element which the other does not, the offenses are not the same for double jeopardy purposes, even though arising from the same conduct or episode. But, where only one offense requires proof of an additional fact, so that all elements of one offense are present in the other, the offenses are deemed to be the same for double jeopardy purposes. And of course if both [offenses] have exactly the same elements, the offenses are also the same within the meaning of the prohibition against double jeopardy.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dixon v. State · State v. Holmes

2. ““Now, murder is divided in two degrees. We have murder in the first degree and again we have murder in the second degree. And the distinction between first degree murder and second degree murder is based on the elements of premeditation and deliberation. “All murders that shall be perpetrated by the means of poison, or lying in wait, or any kind of willful, deliberate and premeditated killing shall be murder in the first degree. “For a homicide to be willful there must be a specific purpose and design to kill. Willful means with intentional purpose as distinguished from an act or negligent act. “An act you don’t have the intent to kill, a negligent act you don’t have the intent to kill. To be premeditated the design to kill must have preceded the killing by an appreciable length of time. That is there must be time enough to deliberate about what you are doing. “Premeditation, as an element of murder, means planned or contrived as a scheme ahead of time for the commission of the fatal act.. “To be deliberate there must be a full and conscious knowledge of the purpose to kill. “Deliberation as an element of murder means acting in a cool state as opposed to a heated state. “Deliberation implies reflection, however brief. “There is no specific length of time required for that deliberation, but there must be reflection, must be time for reflection upon the act before committing it. “Deliberation implies a fixed and determined purpose as distinguished from a sudden impulse. “Delibe”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lipinski v. State · Bowers v. State

3. ““Although we held in Newton that felony murder and the underlying felony are to be considered one offense for purposes of multiple punishment, and therefore the underlying felony would merge into the felony murder conviction, we also emphasized that if a first degree murder conviction is premised upon independent proof of wilfulness, premeditation and deliberation under Art. 27, § 407, then the murder, even though committed in the course of a felony, would not be deemed the same offense as the felony, and there would be no merger. ‘Each offense would then require proof of facts which the other did not, and convictions of both would be proper.’ Newton v. State, supra, 280 Md. at 269 [ 373 A.2d 262 ].” 283 Md. at 716 , 393 A.2d 1372 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 133 Md. App. 325 - Dixon v. State · Bowers v. State