8 Md. App. 153 - Fletcher v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[Y]our verdict must be unanimous. Your [sic] further instructed that there are many — there may be cases in which absolute certainty cannot be expected. Although the verdict must be the verdict of each individual juror as a result of his or her own conviction and not a mere acquiescence in the conclusions of your fellow jurors. Each of you should examine the questions submitted with candor and with a proper regard indifference [sic] to the opinions of your fellow jurors. It is your duty, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, to decide this case if you can conscientiously do so. You should listen with a disposition to be convinced to each other's arguments. If your views are contrary to those of the vast majority you should consider whether your views which make no impression on the minds of so many equally intelligent jurors are correct. You're again reminded that your verdict must be the [sic] unanimous. You must consider the evidence and weigh the evidence in light of the discussions of your fellow jurors. Under the circumstances, madame forelady, in light of the fact that you've only been deliberating for an hour, this court is sending you back for further deliberations in this matter.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 179 Md. App. 32 - Washington v. State

2. ““The ultimate test, however, is whether the wording of the charge and the time, circumstances and conditions under which it is given would threaten or tend to coerce the jury into reaching a verdict which is contrary to any individual juror’s free will and judgment. Otherwise stated, whether the giving of the instruction constitutes reversible error in a given case depends not only upon the language used but upon the conditions and the attendant circumstances under which the instruction is given. The question to be determined is whether resort to the instruction forced or helped to force an agreement which would not otherwise have been reached except for the intimidating or coercive effect of the charge upon some jurors or whether it merely initiated a new train of real deliberation which ended the disagreement and enabled each juror conscientiously and freely to subscribe to the unanimous verdict.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 16 Md. App. 533 - Kelly v. State

3. “We do not feel there is anything technical to be decided here. It's a question of arriving at a judgment,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 179 Md. App. 32 - Washington v. State