Leitel v. State’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. “[w]hoever purposely and maliciously, but without premeditation, kills any human being is guilty of murder in the second degree.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Johnson v. State · Murry v. State

2. ““The Eagan Rule is, of course, helpful to a defendant only in those circumstances where his explanation remains uncontra-dicted either directly or by fair inferences from the testimony and evidence. * * Under the facts of this case, we cannot employ the Eagan Rule to negate the jury’s finding of intent and malice. * * * * * * “When deciding whether a set of facts call for reversal under the Eagan Rule, we must invoke the concept reannounced in Doe: “ < * * * we must accept as true the evidence favorable to the prosecution and give the State the benefit of every favorable inference which may be reasonably and fairly drawn. * * * ’ ****** “ * * * We cannot, therefore, say, as a matter of law, that appellant’s version of the shooting remained unimpeached by other and credible evidence — a condition precedent to a reversal under the Eagan Rule.””

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

3. “"The Eagan Rule is, of course, helpful to a defendant only in those circumstances where his explanation remains uncontradicted either directly or by fair inferences from the testimony and evidence. * * Under the facts of this case, we cannot employ the Eagan Rule to negate the jury's finding of intent and malice. * * * * * * "When deciding whether a set of facts call for reversal under the Eagan Rule, we must invoke the concept reannounced in Doe: "`* * * we must accept as true the evidence favorable to the prosecution and give the State the benefit of every favorable inference which may be reasonably and fairly drawn. * * *' * * * * * * "* * * We cannot, therefore, say, as a matter of law, that appellant's version of the shooting remained unimpeached by other and credible evidence — a condition precedent to a reversal under the Eagan Rule."”

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