Koonce v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 17 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘The most that can be demanded of a venireman in this regard,' we said, ‘is that he be willing to consider all of the penalties provided by state law, and that he not be irrevocably committed, before the trial has begun, to vote against the penalty of death regardless of the facts and circumstances that might emerge in the course of the proceedings. * * * ’ We made it clear that ‘[ujnless a venireman states unambiguously that he would automatically vote against the imposition of capital punishment no matter what the trial might reveal, it simply cannot be assumed that that is his position.’ ””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Eizember v. Trammell · Gibson v. State

2. “This significant distinction is noted in the general rule as stated in Wharton's Criminal Evidence, Twelfth Ed., vol. 3, section 818, page 171, as follows: `The privilege does not arise where an examination of a person is made to determine the existence of a fact or condition, as distinguished from giving him medical treatment. Thus, the privilege does not arise, and a physician may testify as to the result of an examination made for the sole purpose of seeing whether the condition of the patient indicated the commission of the crime, or whether the defendant was sane * * *.'”

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

3. ““When a photograph is shown to be a faithful reproduction of whatever it purports to reproduce, it is admissable in evidence, as an appropriate aid to the jury in applying the evidence and this is equally true whether it relates to persons, things, or places. Although it is error to receive in evidence gruesome photographs of a homicide victim, designed primarily to arouse the passion of the jury, such photographs are admissa-ble when they are relevant to the issues before the court and their probative value is not outweighed by the danger of prejudice to the defendant.””

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