Matthews v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1. Self-defense is an issue; 2. There are facts in evidence which show that the deceased made the first attack on the defendant; and 3. The defendant did some act or used some words intended to and calculated to bring on the difficulty in order to have a pretext for inflicting injury upon the deceased.”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gonzales v. State · Mead v. State

2. “[T]he use of force by a defendant against another is not justified if the defendant provoked the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless (a) the defendant abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and (b) the other person, nevertheless, continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the defendant. So, in this case, if you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, Christopher Edward Juarez, immediately before the difficulty, then and there did some act, or used some language, or did both, as the case may be, with the intent on his, the defendant’s, part, to produce the occasion for shooting Manuel Molina, and to bring on the difficulty with Manuel Molina, and that such words and conduct on the defendant’s part, if there was such, were reasonably calculated to, and did, provoke a difficulty, and that on such account Manuel Molina attacked the defendant with deadly force, or reasonably appeared to the defendant to so attack him or to be attempting to so attack him, and that the defendant then shot Manuel Molina with a deadly weapon, namely, a firearm, in pursuance of his original design, if you find there was such, then you will find the defendant guilty. 1 On the other hand, if you find from the evidence that the acts done or language used by the defendant, if any, were not, under the circumstances, reasonably calculated ”

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

3. “You are further instructed that the law of self-defense is qualified to the extent that a person is not justified in using force or deadly force if he provoked the other person’s use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless: (A) the person abandons the encounter, and (B) the other person, nevertheless, continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the person claiming self-defense. You are further instructed as part of the law of this case, and as a qualification of the law on self-defense, that if you find and believe from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant, Alex Gonzales, immediately before the difficulty then and there did some act, or used some language, or did both, if any, with the intent to produce the occasion to bring on the difficulty and kill Ida Lee Delaney, and that such words and conduct on the defendant’s part, if there was such, were reasonably calculated to, and did provoke a difficulty, and that on such account the said Ida Lee Delaney attacked the defendant, or reasonably appeared to the defendant to so attack him, or to be about to attack him, and that the defendant then killed the said Ida Lee Delaney, in pursuance of his original design, if you find there was such, or if the defendant provoked the difficulty that resulted in the death of the deceased, and by his own wrongful act, if any, produced a necessity for taking the life of the deceased, and you so find beyond a reasonable doubt, you will find against the defendant’”

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