State v. Mallett’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 168 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 174 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Evidence of commission by defendant of crimes separate and distinct from the crime for which he is charged is generally inadmissible.... But such evidence is generally admissible to prove the crime charged when it tends to establish motive, intent, the absence of mistake or accident, a common scheme or plan embracing the commission of two or more crimes so related that proof of one tends to establish the other, or the identity of the person charged with the commission of the crime on trial.... Evidence of other crimes should be admitted under one of these exceptions only when the prejudicial effect of the evidence is outweighed by its probative value. This balancing of prejudicial effect and probative value lies within the sound discretion of the trial court.””

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Depriest · State v. Burgess

2. “Any capital sentencing scheme may occasionally produce an aberrational outcome.... The issue when determining the proportionality of a death sentence is not whether any similar case can be found in which the jury imposed a life sentence, but rather whether the death sentence is excessive or disproportionate in light of similar cases as a whole (citations omitted).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Wilkins · State v. Deck

3. ““Instruction No. 5 A person is responsible for his own conduct and he is also responsible for the conduct of other persons in committing an offense if he acts with them with the common purpose of committing that offense, or if, for the purpose of committing that offense, he aids or encourages the other persons in committing it. If you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that on or about September 7, 1985, in the County of Jasper, State of Missouri, the defendant or Mike Hensley or David Tygart caused the death of Don Tracy by shooting and drowning him, and Second, that the defendant or Mike Hensley or David Tygart were aware that their conduct was practically certain to cause the death of Don Tracy, and Third, that the defendant or Mike Hensley or David Tygart did so after deliberation, which means cool reflection upon the matter for any length of time no matter how brief, then you are instructed that the offense of Murder in the First Degree has occurred, and if you further find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt: Fourth, that with the purpose of promoting or furthering the death of Don Tracy, the defendant acted together with or aided Mike Hensley or David Tygart in causing the death of Don Tracy and did so after deliberation, then you will find the defendant guilty of Murder in the First Degree. However, if you do not find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt each and all of these propositions, you mu”

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