377 So. 2d 640 - Lewis v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

44 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"What is intended to be included are those capital crimes where the actual commission of the capital felony was accompanied by such additional acts as to set the crime apart from the norm of capital felonies — the conscienceless or pitiless crime which is unnecessarily torturous to the victim."”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Amoros v. State · 386 So. 2d 538 - Williams v. State

2. “[I]n cases such as that under review the trial judge need not worry about invading the province of the jury if he restricts his instructions to those involving lawful and unlawful homicide. As pointed out by the District Court, “What we have here is the death of a human being which was either unlawful homicide or lawful homicide.” The death of the victim is not in issue; it is an incontrovertible fact. The jury’s duty is to ascertain whether the defendant caused the victim’s death, and, if so, whether the homicide was justifiable or unjustifiable. If the jury finds that an unlawful homicide has occurred, they must then determine what degree of murder or manslaughter is involved.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Simone · 434 So. 2d 12 - Thomas v. State

3. “a member of a murder victim's family may not testify for the purpose of identification of the deceased where a nonrelated witness is available to provide such identification.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Justus v. State · 569 So. 2d 1234 - Jones v. State