Ferrel v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

56 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “For there to be evidence that Ferrel did not use deadly force, there must have been evidence that the beer bottle was not capable of causing death or serious bodily injury in the manner of its use or intended use. The Court of Appeals held that Ferrel was entitled to a § 9.31(a) self-defense instruction based on the faulty assumption that there was evidence that the beer bottle did not cause serious bodily injury and that, in the manner the bottle was used, it was incapable of causing serious bodily injury. Because we have found that the actual blow of the bottle indisputably caused serious bodily injury to Mc-Manus, Ferrel by definition used deadly force. Hence, a § 9.31(a) self-defense instruction is not applicable and the trial court did not err in refusing to give one.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Prenger v. State

2. “In Murder cases, we see the defense of self-defense come up, and basically — and in order for the defense to prove self-defense, a person’s justified in using deadly force against another if he would be justified in using force under Section 9.31 ... if reasonable person in the actor’s situation would have retreated. So, it says if you — before you ever get self-defense, if a reasonable person would have retreated. You must retreat before using deadly force. When and to the degree he reasonably believes deadly force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other’s use or attempted use of deadly force.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Carmen v. State

3. “Appellant was entitled to receive a self defense instruction if there had been some evidence, even if contradicted, that he believed the display of his gun was immediately necessary to protect himself against the victim's use or attempted use of unlawful force.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jordan v. State