575 So. 2d 181 - Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 126 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 129 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “the state cannot comment on a defendant's failure to produce evidence to refute an element of the crime, because doing so could erroneously lead the jury to believe that the defendant carried the burden of introducing evidence.”

   28 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Grant v. State · Hill v. State

2. “the nature of the weapon used, the presence or absence of adequate provocation, previous difficulties between the parties, the manner in which the homicide was committed and the nature and manner of the wounds inflicted. It must exist for such time before the homicide as will enable the accused to be conscious of the nature of the deed he is about to commit and the probable result to flow from it insofar as the life of the victim is concerned.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bell v. State · 770 So. 2d 1144 - Miller v. State

3. “Although the evidence against Jackson shows that he was a major participant in the crime, it does not show beyond every reasonable doubt that his state of mind was any more culpable than any other armed robber whose murder conviction rests solely upon the theory of felony murder. See Tison, 481 U.S. at 150-51 , 107 S.Ct. at 1684-85 . The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. The totality of the record shows that Jackson previously indicated his intent to rob Phillibert’s store; that Jackson was seen driving in the vicinity of the store shortly before and after the crime; that Jackson had been driving with his brother, whose fingerprints were found on the cash register; that Jackson said afterward “we had to do it because he had bucked the jack”; and that Jackson asked his mother to tell his brother to say “he hadn’t been nowhere around the hardware store and get rid of the gun.” A reasonable inference could be drawn from the evidence in this record that either of the two robbers fired the gun, contrary to the finding of the trial judge. There was no evidence presented in this trial to show that Jackson personally possessed or fired a weapon during the robbery, or that he harmed Phillibert. There was no evidence that Jackson carried a weapon or intended to harm anybody when he walked into the store, or that he expected violence to erupt during the robbery. There was no real opportunity for Jackson to prevent the murder since the crime .took only seconds to occur, an”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Rodriguez · 717 So. 2d 472 - Benedith v. State