Fitzgerald v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 15 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. “The function of the finder of fact in cases tried to a court is identical to that in cases tried to juries, and the same rules are applicable with respect to the standards and principles applied in appellate review.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Mathewson v. State · Romero v. State

2. ““We conclude that the statute on its face is applicable only to trials to the jury. The requirement is present to assure that the jury in fact considers all elements of the crime, and particularly where value may increase the severity of the sentence the jury is asked to specifically consider the element of value in this way. In this case, the property obtained was in the form of a cashier’s check, and value was not in dispute at the trial. On its face it was over the one-hundred-dollar amount required to make the offense a felony. In addition, it is clear that the trial court specifically considered that element of the offense. * * *””

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

3. “(1) the accused actually obtains property by writing a bad check, and (2) the false representation is more than a simple express or implied statement that the check is good, and (3) all of the other elements of the crime of obtaining property by false pretenses are met.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Trevino v. State