Wiseman v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 9 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““... The status of the law in Kentucky as to the propriety of submitting an issue of insanity to the jury is clearly stated in Edwards v. Commonwealth, Ky., 554 S.W.2d 380 (1977).... “As to the quality of the testimony of the expert witnesses, in Tunget v. Commonwealth, 303 Ky. 834 , 198 S.W.2d 785 (1947), we held that even though all expert witnesses testify favorably for the accused as to his insanity, where there is any evidence indicative of his sanity, there is presented an issue of fact for a jury determination. It is not necessary that there be a battle between the experts as to the sanity of the accused. Oftentimes, lay witnesses testifying as to the customary conduct of an accused more nearly reflect his mental capacity than the high sounding names tagged to imaginary self-induced complaints.” Id. at 237-38.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gall v. Parker · Brown v. Commonwealth

2. “indicating that the defendant was sane at the time of the commission of the crime. Tunget v. Commonwealth, 303 Ky. 834 , 198 S.W.2d 785 (1947). More recently, we stated that”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brown v. Commonwealth