701 So. 2d 821 - Koppersmith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[bjecause the evidence of Koppersmith’s intent was excluded, the jury could have been led to believe that even if he in fact did not intend to strike the victim’s head on the bricks, that fact did not lessen his criminal culpability, when in truth the jury would have considered the negative answer to possibly reduce the mens rea from that of reckless manslaughter to that of criminally negligent homicide.””

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

2. “[t]he excluded testimony would have gone directly to the issue of whether Koppersmith was `consciously aware' of the substantial and unjustifiable risk associated with banging the victim's head against the bricks, or whether this risk was just one of which the defendant should have been aware.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 742 So. 2d 206 - Koppersmith v. State