Meeks v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “THE COURT: All right. Mr. Gilmore? MR. GILMORE: Your honor, the defendant, Marshall Lee Meeks, does not have now and has not ever had any recollection of this incident. His last recollection was arriving at his mother’s home at about midnight that night and having some food and then he blacks out. Now, we would like to bring some witnesses to the stand to show what his condition was immediately before and immediately after this incident. Now, his plea of guilty was made upon the testimony that his mother and brother gave at the coroner’s inquest. He has no recollection independently of exactly what happened, but based upon their testimony as to what happened and he felt like that he must have done what he is charged with, and therefore thought he should enter this plea of guilty to it, and I would like to bring his mother and brother and the Sheriff in to show what his condition was immediately prior to and immediately after this killing. Now, I might say this: that he and his wife were separated. They did have two children and he had filed suit up in Indiana for divorce, and he came home for the specific purpose of getting his two children and going back and was told some very disturbing things about what her conduct had been while she was down here and he was up there, and with the Court’s indulgence, I would like to offer some short testimony about it. THE COURT: Well, we would be glad to hear any testimony you may have with reference to fixing punishment or final action i”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Meeks v. Swenson

2. “A. Well, I plead guilty because the evidence showed that—they had it against me, but I still didn’t remember anything about the crime. That is the reason I plead guilty. THE COURT: You say you plead guilty because of the evidence the State had against you, but you still do not have any recollection of the crime. Is that what you just said ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Now Mr. Meeks, at the time that you plead guilty, did anyone force you to plead guilty. A. No, sir. Q. Did anyone compel you to plead guilty? A. No, sir. Q. You were given an option or choice by your counsel whether you would plead guilty or not? A. Yes, sir. Q. You made the decision to plead guilty. A. Yes. Q. Is it your contention before this Court that you didn’t know what you were doing at that time? A. No, sir. Q. In other words, when you did enter your plea of guilty you understood what you were doing. Is that right? A. Yes, sir. Q. Then your position here is that you did not know what you were doing or what happened at the time the events on which your plea was based took place? A. Yes, sir. Q. That you were not responsible for your criminal conduct, at the time of such conduct, because you did not know or appreciate the nature and quality and wrongfulness of your conduct. Is that right? A. Yes, sir. * * * * * * Q. Now, prior to the time that you were brought in here for a Hearing in the Circuit Court, you requested a mental examination, did you not? A. Yes. Q. And you had a mental examination? A. Yes, Sir. I sent to”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Meeks v. Swenson

3. “A pre-sentence investigation was ordered. On April 22, 1969, appellant again appeared in court and reaffirmed his plea of guilty and the court fixed the punishment at 50 years’ imprisonment. Appellant filed an application for parole. The transcript shows no action on the application.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Meeks v. Swenson