Phillips v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 93 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 96 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(b) A challenge for cause may be made by the State for any of the following reasons: (1) That the juror has conscientious scruples in regard to the infliction of the punishment of death for crime, in a capital case, where the State is seeking the death penalty; * * * * * * (3) That he has a bias or prejudice against any phase of the law upon which the State is entitled to rely for conviction or punishment.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Nichols v. State · Livingston v. State

2. “Q. [by defense counsel] — can you conceive of any situation whereby you would answer that special issue number one “no”? A. No, I don’t — I couldn’t pull it out of the air right now, no. Q. Maybe you didn’t understand my question. A. I probably didn’t. Q. Okay. Let’s talk about it a minute. That issue merely asks you whether or not the conduct of the defendant was deliberate and with reasonable expectation. A. Okay. Q. Of course, before you can find someone guilty of capital murder, you’ve got to find that they intentionally did at least two things, the robbery and a murder or rape and murder, whatever. And because of that finding, let’s assume that you were to sit in trial and find someone guilty of capital murder, do you feel compelled that you should answer special issue number one “yes” in each and every case because of that finding? A. It would have to be whether all of the things were proven. Q. Well— A. Yes. If they are proven, yes. Q. But I want to make sure, proven as to the issue or proven as to the case in chief? A. The case. Q. Well, let’s assume that you had found all of the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt and had convicted, in other words, all the proof was there. There was an intentional killing, because that’s all the law requires, an intentional act and not a deliberate act before you can find someone guilty of, let’s say, capital murder. The question I have is, because of that finding would you feel compelled to answer special issue number one “yes” havin”

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

3. “Immediately after appellant indicated that he did not wish to discuss the matter with [the officer], he was taken away from the interrogation room, given lunch, and returned to his cell. Later that afternoon ..., [the officer] took appellant back to the interview room and repeated the Miranda warnings. Appellant did not indicate that he did not want to discuss the matter, but rather stated that he wanted guarantees before he would talk. [The officer] stated that he could make no guarantees and repeated the warning that anything appellant may say could be used against him. Thereafter, appellant gave his confession.”

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