State v. Chaney’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Our statutes divide the instructions in a criminal case into two general classes. The first includes those which Sec. 4070(4) [§ 546.070(4)] mandatorily requires the court to give whether requested or not, ‘upon all questions of law arising in the case which are necessary for their (the jury’s) information in giving their verdict ; which instructions shall include, whenever necessary, the subjects of good character and reasonable doubt.’ It is held these instructions must cover ‘ “all the essential elements of an offense embraced within the charge,” ’ or, as put another way, they must declare the law ‘ “applicable to every crime, or grade of crime, of which, under the evidence, the jury might convict the accused.” ’ Instructions not belonging in that class, such as instructions on evidence and procedure, are called ‘collateral,’ and fall in the second class. As to them, Sec. 4083 [§ 546.-380] provides ‘the court may instruct the jury in writing on any point of law arising in the cause.’ But the defendant must request or tender instructions of that class, save exceptions and preserve the point in his motion for new trial.””

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

2. ““ * * * (4) Whether requested or not, the court must instruct the jury in writing upon all questions of law arising in the case which are necessary for their information in giving their verdict; which instructions shall include, whenever necessary, the subjects of good character and reasonable doubt; and a failure to so instruct in cases of felony shall be good cause, when the defendant is found guilty, for setting aside the verdict of the jury and granting a new trial; * * See also S.Ct. Rule 26.02(6), V.A.M.R.”

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