437 So. 2d 444 - Caylor v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Briefly, the M'Naughten rule is the difference between right and wrong test in the trial of the case on its merits. Myrick v. State, 290 So.2d 259 (Miss. 1974); Hixon v. State, 165 So.2d 436 (Fla.App. 1964). The Dusky rule presents the question of whether or not a defendant has the present competency to stand trial and whether he has sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and whether he has a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him. Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 , 80 S.Ct. 788 , 4 L.Ed.2d 824 (1960).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 932 So. 2d 850 - Carter v. State · 608 So. 2d 304 - Addkison v. State

2. “to avoid placing an accused on trial unless he is capable of conducting a rational defense by intelligently conferring with his counsel.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 536 So. 2d 1347 - Wheeler v. State

3. “Motion for Psychiatric Examination of Defendant.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 608 So. 2d 304 - Addkison v. State