State v. Matthews’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 14 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Now, in this case if the victim in this case was properly diagnosed as dead as the proximate result of the gunshot wound, then no subsequent medical procedure, such as organ removal, would be deemed a cause of death. If the victim's death was prematurely pronounced due to the negligence of a medical practitioner or practitioners, the subsequent procedures may have been a cause of death, but that negligence would not constitute a superseding cause of death, relieving the Defendant of liability. If however, the pronouncements of death were premature due to the gross negligence or the intentional wrongdoing, that is, the reckless or willful wrongdoing, again of a medical practitioner or practitioners, as determined by a grave deviation or gross dilation from accepted medical practices, or disregard for legally cognizable criteria for determining death, or acceptable or — disregard for medically accepted and cognizable criteria for determining death, the intervening medical procedure would then interrupt the chain of causation and then become the legal cause of death. Thus, the propriety of the medical procedures is an integral question to causation. To summarize that, negligence on the part of some one would not relieve the defendant from liability if his injury were again the proximate cause of the death as to that negligence. However, gross negligence or intentional activity on the part of the same practitioners would so relieve him.”

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

2. “Q. And once in the police car, Lieutenant Frazier told him his rights, is that correct? A. Correct. .... Q. Okay, and he chose not — even after being warned, he decided to go ahead and be straight with you and tell you whatever you wanted to know, isn't that right? A. Yes, sir. .... Q. At the station, once again you read him his rights, isn't that correct? A. Yes.”

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

3. “We find no reversible error in the judge's failure to require the jury, before considering the statement, to find a waiver of constitutional rights. The jury could not have found that the statement was given freely and voluntarily unless it believed that the appellant had waived his constitutional rights. This exception lacks merit.”

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