Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “This final issue arises from comments that the prosecuting attorney made to the jury during his closing arguments in the penalty phase of the trial: I would suggest to you that the murder, the crime that the Defendant did in this case — his actions represent one of civilized society’s worst nightmares, a situation in which in broad light of day, in the middle of the day, in a peaceful neighborhood here in Northwest Arkansas, with a housewife/grandmother coming home to fix her lunch, feeling totally safe in the sanctuary of home that she instead was faced with an armed and bold, calculating and ruthless criminal who saw her cross the street and decided this was a chance for some quick easy money and grabbed up his gun and drove over there and went in specifically looking for her. This wasn’t one of those deals where they were trying to burglarize a house and accidentally stumbled upon somebody that’s in there, or even that they came home, which is another reason to consider the seriousness of the burglary of Mike and Sharon [Haley]. What if Sharon had come home? What then? The trial judge’s control of such remarks during closing arguments is discretionary and will not be reversed in the absence of an abuse of discretion. For example, in Wilson v. State, 295 Ark. 682 , 751 S.W.2d 734 (1988), the prosecutor asked the jurors to impose the death penalty and to “tell Ron Wilson he will never commit another murder.” Wilson, 295 Ark. at 690 , 751 S.W.2d at 739 . The trial court refus”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 868 F. Supp. 1471 - Ruiz v. Norris

2. “Davis received a psychiatric evaluation at state expense from the Ozark Guidance Center. The psychiatrist there concluded that there was a lack of psychosis but that Davis did have attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder residual [ADHD], which could have contributed to the commission of the offenses. Subsequently, Davis, joined by the State, filed a motion for psychiatric evaluation at the Arkansas State Hospital, which was granted. The resulting medical report revealed no psychoses but did indicate a psychoactive substance abuse and antisocial personality disorder. Next, Davis asked the court for funds to employ an independent psychiatric examiner, which the court refused to do. ... In light of these cases, we conclude that the trial court did not err in refusing to approve funding of a private psychiatric evaluation for Davis after approving two previous evaluations.”

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

3. “When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, this court does not reweigh the evidence but determines instead whether the evidence supporting the verdict is substantial. Substantial evidence is defined as direct or circumstantial evidence that is forceful enough to compel reasonable minds to reach a conclusion one way or another and that goes beyond mere speculation or conjecture. In determining whether there is substantial evidence, this court reviews the evidence in the light most favorable to the State. Only evidence supporting the verdict is considered. We will affirm if there is any substantial evidence to support the verdict.”

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