Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 744 SW2D 290 - Morris v. State

Morris v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
March 1993
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Angrist v. United States · Arkansas Public Service Commission v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. · Hagemann v. American Savings & Loan Ass'n · Adams v. State · Burdine v. State

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

  1. “It is an affirmative defense to prosecution that, at the time of the conduct charged, the defendant, as a result of severe mental disease or defect, did not know that his conduct was wrong. The term “mental disease or defect” does not include an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise anti-social conduct. The burden of proof is on the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that at the time of the conduct charged the defendant was sane; that is, that he was not suffering from a severe mental disease or defect rendering him unable to know that his conduct was wrong. Therefore, if you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the offense of aggravated sexual assault as alleged in the indictment, or the lesser included offense of aggravated assault as herein-before charged, but you further find, or have a reasonable doubt thereof, that at the time of the conduct charged, [appellant], as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, did not know that his conduct was wrong, you will acquit the defendant and say by your verdict “not guilty by reason of insanity”.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.