Davis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““MR. JOHNSON: As His Honor went over with you, if you are selected as one of the jurors in this case, if it falls upon your shoulders to set punishment in this case, as His Honor also told you this indictment charges murder in the first degree and the punishment for murder in the first degree is life imprisonment in the penitentiary. With that in mind let me ask you this: Can any of you say, and think about this now in your mind, can any of you exclude that you would not consider life imprisonment in the penitentiary in first degree murder in this case? “THE COURT: Rephrase that, please, sir. “MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir. “THE COURT: Are you saying to them if any of them know right now they would not give life imprisonment regardless of the facts or circumstances? “MR. JOHNSON: Yes, sir. “THE COURT: Any of you right now know before we get started that you would not convict this Defendant of first degree murder because the punishment is life imprisonment regardless of what the facts show, any of you know that right now? “JUROR STEPHENS: I couldn’t say that to them words, but it would have some bearing on what I think about it. “THE COURT: In other words, you’re saying right now, without hearing any of it, you would not convict this Defendant of murder in the first degree? I’m not arguing, I just want to know that’s right, if you think that. But you know right now you could not convict this Defendant of murder in the first degree? “JUROR STEPHENS: Not in those words, no. “THE COURT: ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Wood v. State

2. “. . [I]t would appear that (and this Court does hold) that a general question concerning the juror’s ‘fixed opinion’ about penitentiary confinement will not suffice. Instead he should be examined further to determine if his opposition is such that he would not inflict penitentiary confinement regardless of the evidence and instructions of the Court as to the law. ...””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Wood v. State