Adkins v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
March 1985
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Allen v. United States · Wilson v. State · Brown v. State · Jenkins v. State
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“However, a trial judge may not coerce the jury into reaching a verdict and, for that reason, any such charge must be carefully examined to determine its total effect on the jury in reaching a verdict.*** It is basic to our criminal law that a jury verdict must be unanimous and freely given and that, in order to convict, each individual juror must be convinced of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; it is likewise basic that there is no absolute necessity that the jury reach a verdict. The danger of a “dynamite charge” is that it may suggest to the jurors that these fundamental standards might be compromised in order that a verdict be reached. * * * Nevertheless, we believe that this danger can be eliminated by having the charge include an admonition that each individual juror not surrender his or her honest convictions and not to return any verdict contrary to the dictates of person al conscience. * * * Without such an admonition, any supplementary charge may be, for that reason alone, overly coercive.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rush v. State
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.