State v. Tisius’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

27 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It is particularly difficult to obtain relief based on an assertion of plain error concerning closing argument because the failure to "object during closing argument is more likely a function of trial strategy than of error. Plain error relief seldom is, granted on assertions of error relating to closing arguments because absence of an objection and request .for relief during closing arguments mean that any intervention by the circuit court would have been uninvited and may have caused increased error. Therefore, to be entitled to relief under plain error review, [defendant] must, establish that the improper argument had a decisive effect on the outcome of the trial and amounts to manifest injustice. [Defendant] bears- the burden to. prove the decisive effect. . t, . ■„”

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

2. “When a party inquires into part of an act, occurrence, or transaction they have “opened the door” to testimony regarding that act, occurrence, or transaction, and the opposing party is entitled to inquire into other parts of it in order to rebut possible inferences that may be drawn from an incomplete version presented by the adversary or to prove the party’s own version of events. Here, [Mr.] Tisius sought testimony from Dr. Taylor demonstrating his remorse and sorrow for murdering two peace officers. The State’s cross-examination of Dr. Taylor was an attempt to discredit the veracity of [Mr.] Tisius’ feelings as he related them to Dr. Taylor.”

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

3. ““ ‘[Instructional error seldom constitutes plain error....’” State v. Tillman, 289 S.W.3d 282, 291 (Mo.App. W.D.2009) (quoting State v. Darden, 263 S.W.3d 760, 763 (Mo.App. W.D.2008)).... “ ‘If a defect is not readily apparent to alert counsel preparing to argue the case, there is very little likelihood that the jury will be confused or misled.’ ” State v. Tisius, 362 S.W.3d 398, 411 (Mo. banc 2012) (quoting State v. Green, 812 S.W.2d 779, 787 (Mo.App. W.D.1991)).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff-Respondent v. BOBBY GLEN ROST