State v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Appellant’s first assignment of error is based upon the trial court’s excusing a venire person upon voir dire. This claim of error arose from the trial court’s questioning of the panel members, in which he asked whether any of the members of the panel were disqualified for statutory reasons (§ 494.020.1, RSMo 1978), including conviction for a felony without restoration of civil rights or conviction for a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude. One panel member responded that she was ‘caught shoplifting once’ two years earlier. The court stated: ‘-No. 39 was convicted of shoplifting. Do you have any objections? ‘MR. STERLING (defense counsel): I object to that. She has not had her civil rights restored. ‘THE COURT: She said she was convicted two years ago. ‘MR. STERLING: I want my objection noted. It has been overruled. ‘THE COURT: Overruled.’ The court then struck venireperson No. 39 from the jury panel. In his motion for new trial, the error asserted in the trial court’s ruling was in the trial court’s striking the venireperson from the panel ‘without permitting counsel to inquire as to the nature of a conviction, if any.’ In this Court, the assignment is that the court erred because the venireperson’s response that she had been ‘caught shoplifting’ did not demonstrate that she had been convicted of a felony or of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude. The recital of the occurrence in the trial court shows clearly that no such objection was raised in that court. The object”

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