Langford v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

23 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “' "If one knowingly and consciously drives a high-powered automobile . . at an excessive rate of speed into a railroad train moving over a street crossing, knowing that the train is moving over the crossing, and that the automobile will strike the train , and that death will probably result to one or more occupants of the car, although without any preconceived purpose to deprive any particular person of life, but with a reckless disregard of human life, and death results from such act, the driver of the automobile may be guilty of murder in the first degree under the fourth division. . If he did not know that he was driving the automobile into the train, and he did not determine to drive it into the train regardless of consequences , but if the act of so driving it was purely accidental, but while in the commission of an unlawful act, such as driving along a public highway at a reckless rate of speed, or exceeding the speed limit, the offense would be manslaughter.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 504 So. 2d 339 - Watson v. State · 357 So. 2d 1011 - Napier v. State

2. “"As Langford has correctly pointed out, in the instant case, the defendant determined only to drive upon the highway after drinking. There is no showing that he determined to have a collision; nor is there any evidence that he realized the likelihood of a collision; and the consequent taking of human life, and proceeded in the face of such probabilities." (At 315)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 539 So. 2d 1124 - Allen v. State · 357 So. 2d 1011 - Napier v. State

3. ““The Grand Jury of said County charge, that before the finding of this indictment, James Robert Whitt, whose name is unknown to the Grand Jury other than as stated, unlawfully killed Vickie Lynn Schmidt, by perpetrating an act greatly dangerous to the lives of others, and evidencing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any preconceived purpose to deprive any particular person of life by, to-wit: operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquors or narcotic drugs along a highway and while operating the said motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquors or narcotic drugs did run the motor vehicle in which the said Vickie Lynn Schmidt was driving over, upon, into or against the motor vehicle in which the said Vickie Lynn Schmidt was driving and as a proximate cause thereof, unlawfully killed the said Vickie Lynn Schmidt, against the peace and dignity of the State of Alabama.” (Emphasis supplied.)”

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