Wright v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

27 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]e have previously held that the use of handcuffs would cause the reasonable person to feel that one was not free to leave, and that one's freedom of movement was restrained to the degree associated with a formal arrest.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Payne v. State · Newell v. State

2. “An instruction given to the jury must be a correct statement of the law, be applicable to the evidence adduced at trial, and be relevant to the issues the jury must decide in reaching its verdict.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Danner v. State · Kilgore v. State

3. “When a party asks a trial court to instruct the jury on an alleged lesser-included offense of the erime charged, the court must conduct a three-part analysis to determine whether the instruction is appropriate. In the first step, the court must compare the statute defining the crime charged and the statute defining the alleged lesser-included offense. If the alleged lesser-included offense may be established by proof of all of the same or proof of less than all of the same material elements to the crime, or if the only difference between the two statutes is that the alleged lesser-included offense requires proof of a lesser culpability, then the alleged lesser-included offense is inherently included in the crime charged. In the second step, if the trial court determines that the alleged lesser-included offense is not inherently included in the charged crime, it must compare the statute defining the alleged lesser-included offense with the charging instrument in the case. If all of the elements of the alleged lesser-included offense are covered by the allegations in the charging instrument, then the al leged lesser-included offense is factually included in the charged crime. If the trial court has determined that the alleged lesser-included offense is either inherently or factually included in the charged crime, then it must proceed to the third step. In the third step, the trial court must examine the evidence presented by each party and determine whether there is a serious e”

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