Gray v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 99 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 111 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “BY THE COURT: All right. How about Capital Punishment now, you folks, you four up here. Do you have any conscientious scruples against it, Mr. Cooksey? BY MR. COOKSEY: Yes, sir. BY THE COURT: Huh? BY MR. COOKSEY: Yes, sir. BY THE COURT: You do? BY MR. COOKSEY: I do. BY THE COURT: You could not impose it, under any conditions? BY MR. COOKSEY: No, sir. BY THE COURT: Regardless of what the evidence might show, you could not impose the Death Penalty? BY MR. COOKSEY: I could not. BY THE COURT: All right, sir. I'll let you step down. * * * * * * BY THE COURT: Mrs. Hebert, have you heard all the questions that's [sic] been asked today? BY MRS. HEBERT: Yes, sir. BY THE COURT: Do you know anybody that's involved in this case? BY MRS. HEBERT: No, sir. BY THE COURT: You know any reason you couldn't be a fair Juror? BY MRS. HEBERT: Yes, sir. BY THE COURT: What's that? BY MRS. HEBERT: I would not vote for the Death Penalty. BY THE COURT: You would not vote for the Death Penalty under any circumstances, is that what you tell me? BY MRS. HEBERT: Yes, sir. BY THE COURT: Regardless of what the evidence might show, you would not vote for it. Is that right, Mrs. Hebert? BY MRS. HEBERT: That's right. BY THE COURT: All right, you can step down, Mrs. Hebert. Call back tomorrow afternoon.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Jones v. State · 517 So. 2d 1295 - Jones v. State

2. “Mellen: ... [I]t is kind of generally speaking — conscientious, it goes to your conscience, deep down for some reason, morally, ethically, or for some reason inside you have scruples against it. That means you've got feelings deep down against the death sentence ... Let me be just straight out. If you are selected on that jury, then you would be sitting in this jury box and if the States proves it [sic] case, that is guilt, then you would have to decide to give death or not. You would. Court: They could decide either way, counsel. Mellen: I thought I said "could". Do you understand that? Now, having said that, and I'll go back to that same question that the Court did about conscientious scruples, if there is someone who has conscientious scruples against the infliction of the death sentence where the law and the facts would justify the death sentence in this case, which you could not vote for death. Is there anybody — (juror raises hand) all right. You raised your hand yesterday. Is there anybody new? (Juror raises hand).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 607 So. 2d 1107 - Russell v. State · 650 So. 2d 1289 - MacK v. State

3. “The Court instructs the Jury that intent to steal is a necessary element of the crime of murder while engaged in the commission or robbery and such intent to steal must be formulated by the Defendant prior to or contemporaneously with the homicide. If you find from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the Defendant, GREGORY MONTECARLO JONES, murdered Josie Jones but that the intent to steal was formulated afterwards, you may not find the Defendant guilty of Capital Murder but may find him guilty of Murder.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jones v. State · 517 So. 2d 1295 - Jones v. State