State v. McCarver’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

115 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 123 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Issues and Recommendation as to Punishment”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. DeCastro · State v. Cummings

2. “As to Issue Number Four, I instruct you that your answer to Issue Number Four—that your answer to Issue Number Four, whether you answer "yes" or "no" must be unanimous. Members of the jury, I am going to ask that you resume your deliberations in an attempt to return a recommendation. I have already instructed you that your recommendation must be unanimous. That is, each of you must agree on the recommendation. I shall give you these additional instructions. First, it is your duty to consult with one another and deliberate with a view towards reaching a recommendation, if it can be done without violence to individual judgment. And second, each of you must decide the case for yourself, and your recommendation for yourself, but only after an impartial consideration of the evidence with your fellow jurors. Third, in the course of your deliberations you should not hesitate to reexamine your own views, and to change your opinion, if you become convinced it is erroneous. On the other hand, you should not hesitate to hold to your views and opinions if you remain convinced that they are correct. Fourth, no juror should surrender his or her honest conviction as to the weight or the effect of the evidence solely because of the opinion of their fellow jurors, or for the mere purpose of reaching a recommendation. Fifth, your inability to reach a unanimous recommendation as to punishment should not be your concern, but should simply be reported to the Court. Please be mindful that I am in ”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Winkler v. State · State v. Cheek

3. “Not every disruptive event occurring during the course of the trial requires the court automatically to declare a mistrial, and if in the sound discretion of the trial judge it is possible, despite the untoward event, to preserve defendant's basic right to receive a fair trial before an unbiased jury, then the motion for mistrial should be denied. On appeal, the decision of the trial judge in this regard is entitled to the greatest respect. He is present while the events unfold and is in a position to know far better than the printed record can ever reflect just how far the jury may have been influenced by the events occurring during the trial and whether it has been possible to erase the prejudicial effect of some outburst. Therefore, unless his ruling is clearly erroneous so as to amount to a manifest abuse of discretion, it will not be disturbed on appeal.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Sanders · 176 N.C. App. 190 - State v. Gladden