State v. Murrin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

28 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'(1) First, the appellate court should consider the reviewability of the issue from both jurisdiction and preservation viewpoints, exercising an unlimited standard of review; (2) next, the court should use an unlimited review to determine whether the instruction was legally appropriate; (3) then, the court should determine whether there was sufficient evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant or the requesting party, that would have supported the instruction; and (4) finally, if the district court erred, the appellate court must determine whether the error was harmless, utilizing the test and degree of certainty set forth in State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 , 256 P.3d 801 (2011), cert. denied [ 565 U.S. 1221 ] (2012)'. "'Generally, a defendant is entitled to instructions on the law applicable to his or her defense theory if there is sufficient evidence for a rational factfinder to find for the defendant on that theory. And if that defendant requests an instruction at trial, the court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant.' "We examine 'jury instructions as a whole, without focusing on any single instruction, in order to determine whether they properly and fairly state the applicable law or whether it is reasonable to conclude that they could have misled the jury.' [Citations omitted.]”

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

2. “An act committed while in a state of voluntary intoxication is not less criminal by reason thereof, but when a particular intent or other state of mind is a necessary element to constitute a particular crime, the fact of intoxication may be taken into consideration in determining such intent or state of mind.”

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

3. “'fairly and accurately state[s] the applicable law, and an instruction that does not do so [is] legally infirm.'”

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