Flake v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In your deliberations on the charges against [McBride], you should first determine whether [MeBride] is guilty or not guilty of attempted murder. In order to prove [MeBride] guilty of attempted murder, as alleged in count one of the Information, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements. That on or about the tenth day of November, 1998, [McBride] did one, intentionally shoot a handgun at Jeffrey Garrison; two, with the intent to kill Jeffrey Garrison; Three, the shooting of Jeffrey Garrison constituted a substantial step towards the killing of Jeffrey Garrison. If the State has proved each of these elements then [McBride] is guilty of attempted murder and the appropriate form of your verdict would be, "We, the jury, find the defendant, Brady McBride, guilty of attempted murder, as charged in count one." If the State has failed to prove each of these elements then [McBride] is not guilty and the appropriate form of your verdict would be, "We, the jury, find the defendant, Brady McBride, not guilty of attempted murder, as charged in count one." If you find [McBride] not guilty of attempted murder, you should then consider count two, battery. If you find [McBride] guilty of attempted murder, you need not consider any other offenses.”

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

2. “Under the Constitution of the State of Indiana the jury is given the right to determine both the law and the facts. The instructions of the Court are your best source in determining the law.”

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

3. “A defendant is only entitled to a reversal if he affirmatively demonstrates that the instructional error prejudiced his substantial rights.”

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