455 So. 2d 930 - Hill 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “it is not error for a judge other than the one who tried the accused to pronounce judgment and sentence.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 507 So. 2d 111 - Duren v. State · 570 So. 2d 784 - Dover v. State

2. “"The defendant, Walter Hill, was about 45 years old on January 7, 1977. The defendant was at the home of Willie Mae Hammock, John and Lois Tatum and Robert and Toni Hammock [then 13-years of age]. Some time after 4:30 on the evening of the 7th, Walter Hill asked Willie Mae Hammock if he could marry Toni. Willie Mae said, 'No,' and then went to a clothes closet in the front bedroom. Walter Hill followed her to the closet and shot her in the back of the head. Walter Hill then went to the dining room and shot John Tatum, Lois Tatum's retarded brother, in the back of the head twice. Then the defendant chased Lois Tatum through the house catching her and shooting her in the back of the head. "Thereupon, the defendant told Toni to get her clothes, and leaving 814 Mulga Avenue they proceeded to Atlanta, Georgia, where [the] defendant kidnapped a man, telling him he had killed three people and would kill anyone that got in his way. "Thereupon, on January 9, 1977, the defendant was apprehended in Williamston, North Carolina, having in his possession a *Page 1225 .32 caliber pistol that was proved to be the murder weapon."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 695 So. 2d 1223 - Hill v. State

3. “A defendant convicted under § 13-11-2 of the 1975 statute is entitled to a new trial because of the preclusion clause in the statute if there was evidence introduced at trial which would have warranted a jury instruction on a lesser included offense or if the defendant suggests any plausible claim not contradicted by his own testimony which he might conceivably have made which would have entitled him to a jury instruction on a lesser included offense.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 494 So. 2d 726 - Wright v. State