371 So. 2d 60 - Hill v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DISTRICT ATTORNEY RAYBURN: “Q Now, Mrs. Terrell, I will ask you a specific question of whether if you were to sit on trial of Mr. Beck as to whether or not you would automatically vote against the imposition of the death penalty, no matter what the evidence introduced at the trial might reveal? “A Your Honor, may I explain myself? I would not automatically do anything. I don’t understand the question, but I can explain myself. “THE COURT: Go ahead, explain what you would or would not do. “A If I was sitting on Mr. Beck’s trial, anybody else’s trial, I would not automatically give no death penalty because I don’t believe in the death penalty. But, if I was on trial and I had to, I could. “THE COURT: Let’s go a little bit further into it. What do you mean by ‘have to?’ “A Okay, May I explain myself? “THE COURT: Yes. “A If I was on the jury and everybody else seemed that it had to be a death penalty, and I was the last one, I could go along with him. “THE COURT: Do I understand you that if eleven people on the jury, you were the twelfth one, and all of the other eleven voted for the death penalty, that in that case you would vote for the death penalty— “A Yes, sir. “Q —to make it unanimous? “A Yes, I would. “THE COURT: All right. “MR. CARROLL: We have nothing further, Judge. “THE COURT: Anything further? “(Whereupon, District Attorney Rayburn continued his examination:) “Q Let me put it another way. “MR. CARROLL: Judge, the witness has answered the questio”

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

2. “"On the trial for any offense which may be punished capitally or by imprisonment in the penitentiary, it is a good cause of challenge by the state that the person has a fixed opinion against capital or penitentiary punishments, or thinks that a conviction should not be had on circumstantial evidence; which cause of challenge may be proved by the oath of the person or by other evidence." (Emphasis supplied)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 377 So. 2d 145 - Crawford v. State