Babbage v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[w]hile there is [conflicting] evidence regarding precisely “who did what” . . . there is ample evidence to implicate [Cooper] either as a principal or as a party to the crimes. See OCGA § 16-2-20 (persons “concerned in the commission of a crime,” by way of intentionally aiding and abetting or intentionally advising, encouraging, or counseling another to commit such crime, may be charged with and convicted of commission of the crime); see also Hassel v. State, 294 Ga. 834 (1) ( 755 SE2d 134 ) (2014) (evidence regarding defendant’s presence at crime scene, motive, and conduct before and after crime was sufficient to establish guilt as an accomplice); Rush v. State, 294 Ga. 388, 389 (1) ( 754 SE2d 63 ) (2014) (“[presence, companionship, and conduct before and after an offense is committed are circumstances from which participation in the criminal act may be inferred”).”

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

2. “Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments require jury determination as to facts that increase the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum or increase the prescribed range of penalties to which a criminal defendant is exposed”

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