Hollins v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The motion ... is addressed to the discretion of the court, which should be exercised with caution, and the power .to grant a new trial should be invoked only in exceptional cases in which the evidence preponderates heavily against the verdict. However, the evidence should be weighed in the light most favorable to the verdict. A reversal on the grounds that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, unlike a reversal based on insufficient evidence, does not mean that acquittal was the only proper verdict. Rather, ... the court simply disagrees with the jury’s resolution of the conflicting testimony. This difference of opinion does not signify acquittal any more than a disagreement among the jurors themselves. Instead, the proper remedy is to grant a new trial.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Pulliam v. State · Johnson v. State

2. “In this case Hollins was present at the time the crime was committed, he gave the drugs to Jackson to sell to the agent and he shared in the profits from the sale. He obviously aided and abetted the crime committed. The instruction clearly informs the jury that if it finds that Hollins aided and abetted Jackson in the commission of the crime, he can be held guilty as a principal and punished as such. Although aiding and abetting was not officially part of Hollins's indictment, the evidence presented clearly supports the instruction.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 893 So. 2d 1071 - Norris v. State · 870 So. 2d 1241 - Pratt v. State

3. “Any person who is present at the commission of a criminal offense and aids, counsels, or encourages another in the commission of that offense is an `aider and abettor' and is equally guilty with the principal offender.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 893 So. 2d 1071 - Norris v. State