State v. Persitz’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “If the past history includes a clinical record wherein psychiatric opinions appear * * *, it may be that such evidence would be admissible * * * to explain `the whole man' as he was before the events of the crime and before the miasma of after-the-crime rationalizations.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Griese · State v. Mills

2. “The elements of Murder in the 2nd Degree are: First, the death of Barbara Jean Smith must be proven. Second, Willilam [sic] Joseph Robinson caused the death of Barbara Jean Smith. Third, William Joseph Robinson acted with the intent to kill Barbara Jean Smith. * * * * * * Fourth, William Joseph Robinson did not act in the heat of passion provoked by such words or acts as would provoke a person of ordinary self-control in like circumstances. Even if William Joseph Robinson acted with the intent to kill Barbara Jean Smith, if he acted in the heat of passion, he is not guilty of Murder in the 2nd Degree. However, such heat of passion is not an excuse for the killing of another person. The heat of passion may cloud his reason and weaken his willpower and this is a circumstance which the law considers in fixing the degree of crime. If the heat of passion is provoked by words which would provoke a person of ordinary self-control in the same circumstances, the law provides that an intentional killing is Manslaughter in the 1st Degree. ⅜ ⅝ sjc ⅜ ⅜ ⅜ If you have [sic] find that each of these elements has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt except that you find it has not been proved that William Joseph Robinson did not act in the heat of passion, William Joseph Robinson is guilty of Manslaughter in the 1st Degree.”

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

3. “Under the statutes of Minnesota a person is not criminally liable for his acts when at the time of committing these acts because of a defect of reason caused by a mental illness the person did not know the nature of his acts or did not know that they were wrong. * * * First, the defendant did not know the nature of his act. This means that the defendant did not understand what he was doing. If because of a defect of reason the defendant did not know what act he was doing or what the consequences of his act would be, then the defendant did not know the nature of his act. Second, even if the defendant knew the nature of his act, the defendant did not understand that his act was wrong. The word wrong is also used in the moral sense and does not only refer to a violation of a statute. Stated another way, even if the defendant realized that his act violated the law, the defendant is not criminally liable if because of a defect of reason caused by a mental illness the defendant did not understand that his act was morally wrong. Third, the failure of the defendant to know the nature of his act or that it was wrong must have been the result of a defect of reason caused by a mental illness.”

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