McCuin v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Under our view of the record, we are of the opinion that the trial court fell into error in failing to charge on the right of self-defense against multiple assailants. In 4 Branch’s Annotated Penal Code (2d ed. 1956, Stout) Sec. 2113, p. 441, the author announced the rule in these words: ‘If there is evidence that more than one assailed defendant, the charge of the court is too restrictive if it confines the right of self-defense to the acts of deceased.’ “One of the cases cited in the text, Wilson v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R. 424 , 145 S.W.2d 890, 893 (1940), is sufficient to illustrate the rule: “ ‘When there is evidence, viewed from the accused’s standpoint, that he was in danger of an unlawful attack or a threatened attack at the hands of more than one assailant, the court should instruct the jury that he had a right to defend himself against either or both of them. In support of the views herein expressed we refer to the following cases: Petty v. State, 126 Tex.Cr.R. 185 , 70 S.W.2d 718 ; Smart v. State, Tex.Cr.App., [ 140 Tex.Cr.R. 664 ], 146 S.W.2d 397 , opinion delivered Dec. 4, 1940.’ See also, 29 Tex.Jur.2d, Homicide, Sec. 317, p. 605 (1961) and cases therein cited. “Because the Court’s charge on the law of self-defense unduly limited the jury in passing upon appellant’s right of self-defense, the judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause is remanded. This disposition makes it unnecessary for us to pass upon the other grounds of error brought forward by the ”

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