Twitchell v. The Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 4 district · 37 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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ First. Petitioners challenged the validity of the statute of Illinois, under and pursuant to which the trial jury was selected and empanelled, on the ground of repugnancy to the Constitution of the United States, and the state court sustained the validity of the statute. “Second. Petitioners asserted and claimed, under the Constitution of the United States, the right, privilege, and immunity of trial by an impartial jury, and the decision of the state court was against the right, privilege, and immunity so asserted and claimed. “Third. The State of Illinois made, and the state court enforced against petitioners, a law (the aforesaid statute) whereby the privileges and immunities of petitioners, as citizens of the United States, were abridged, contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution. “ Fourth. Upon their trial for a capital offence, petitioners were compelled by the state court to be witnesses against themselves, contrary to the provisions of the Constitution of the United States which declare that " no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,’ and that ‘ no person shall be deprived of life or liberty without due process of law.’ “ Fifth. That by the action of the state court in said trial petitioners were denied ‘the equal protection of the laws,’ contrary to the guaranty of the said Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Spies v. Illinois

2. ““No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury. * * * Nor shall any person be subject, for the same offense, to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb. Nor shall be compelled, in any criminal case, to be a witness against lnmself,-nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law,” etc.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex parte Ulrich

3. “powers granted in the instrument itself and not of distinct governments framed by different persons and for different purposes. If these propositions be correct, the Fifth Amendment must be understood as restraining the power of the General Government, not as applicable to the States.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Talton v. Mayes