Farrar v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 30 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “... the standard governing jury instructions relative to flight is not whether other explanations may be explicable of the circumstances surrounding the apprehension, but whether, viewed in the context of other evidence, it tends to establish guilt or innocence.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mitchell v. State · Voran v. State

2. ““INSTRUCTION NO. 9: “You are further instructed that evidence has been introduced for the purpose of showing that the defendants departed from the scene of the alleged crime. Flight of a defendant is a circumstance which the jury may consider in determining guilt. You are instructed that in considering the subject of. flight, you must first determine whether or not the actions of a defendant constitute flight. In this connection, you are told that you may consider all the facts and circumstances before you; and if, after a consideration of such evidence, you are convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a defendant fled with guilty knowledge of the alleged crime and to avoid prosecution, then such flight is a circumstance that may be considered by you with all the other facts and circumstances in evidence in determining the question of his guilt or innocence.””

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

3. ““This court stated in Harris v. State, Okl.Cr., 400 P.2d 64 (1965), quoting Exleton v. State, 30 Okl.Cr. 224 , 235 P. 627 (1925): “ ‘It is not an essential prerequisite that a transcript of the evidence taken at a preliminary trial be filed with the court clerk in order to render it admissible in evidence, when otherwise competent and material.’ ” “The defendant also cites 12 O.S.1961, § 448, but that section is not material to this case and has to deal with civil not criminal actions. Therefore, we find that the testimony of the witness by transcript was proper and that it was not necessary for the transcript to have been filed with the court clerk in order to be admissible at trial.””

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