391 So. 2d 614 - Cooley v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Even in a case where a violation is demonstrated to have actually occurred, nevertheless, it will be considered harmless error if the whole record demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that it was without any substantial prejudicial effect under all of the facts and circumstances of the case. United States v. Whitaker, 592 F.2d 826 (5th Cir.1979). In United States v. Dixon, 593 F.2d 626 (5th Cir. 1979), the Court said: The decision requires an examination of the facts, the trial context of the error, and the prejudice created thereby as juxtaposed against the strength of the evidence of defendant's guilt. ( 593 F.2d at 629 ).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Starr v. State · 799 So. 2d 874 - Hopkins v. State

2. “Insulting words can never justify a homicide unless they are of such nature as to cause defendant to believe he is threatened with grave, impending danger. [ Reed v. State, 197 So.2d 811, 814 (Miss. 1967)]. Be that as it may, there is no principle of criminal law better settled — none more necessary to the peace of society, and the safety of human life — than that threats, however deliberately made, do not justify an assault and battery, much less the taking the life of the party making them. That is excused when done in the necessary defense of one's own life, or to escape great bodily harm. [T]he law tolerates no justification, and accepts no excuse for the destruction of human life, on the plea of self-defense, except that the death of the adversary was necessary, or apparently so, to save his own life, or his person from great bodily injury, and there shall be imminent danger of such design being accomplished. The danger to life, or of great personal injury, must be imminent, present at the time of the killing, real or apparent, and so urgent that there is no reasonable mode of escape except to take life. [ Evans v. State, 44 Miss. 762, 773 (1871)]. It is not true that a party has a right to kill another on the first appearance of danger. The rule is that to defend on alleged threats and apprehension of threats there must be a demonstration by the party making the threat which would induce a reasonable man to believe that there was danger of such threat being immediately ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 418 So. 2d 69 - Holliday v. State

3. “The jury, however, in finding Cooley guilty of manslaughter acquitted him of murder and, since no other explanation appears from the record, apparently accepted Cooley's statement and found him guilty of the lesser offense of manslaughter.”

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