Doisher v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Intent may be proved by circumstantial evidence. It rarely can be established by any other means. While witnesses may see and hear and thus be able to give direct evidence of what a defendant does or fails to do, there can be no eyewitnesses to the state of mind with which the acts were done or omitted. But what a defendant does or fails to do may indicate intent or lack of intent. It is reasonable to infer that a person ordinarily intends the natural and probable consequences of acts he knowingly does or knowingly omits. Any such reasonable inference is entitled to be considered by the jury in determining whether or not the prosecution has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant possessed the required intent. In determining issues of intent, the jury is entitled to consider any statements made and acts done or omitted by the accused, and all facts circumstances in evidence which may aid determination of state of mind. [Emphasis added.]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Walker v. State · Hohman v. State

2. “[w]hen following this his wife made the statement ‘It’s your temper, your temper has done it again.’ Watson's failure to comment is entirely consistent with an understandable weariness and a reluctance to explain once again the events that he had already explained to the police, and a reluctance also to engage in a controversy with his wife who at the time was in a state of shock and not very coherent. In these circumstances, we be-Heve that the failure by Watson to reply to his wife’s statement does not give rise to any inference that he thereby impliedly acknowledged that he had shot Gris-som in a fit of temper rather than, as he claimed, in self-defense. 8 (emphasis supplied)”

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

3. “In Doisher’s case the testimony was clear that he did not respond to his wife’s accusation. Doisher had not been subjected to long police questioning; we do not have a conflict with Doisher’s constitutional right as we could have in a situation in which he was in the presence of police officers.”

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