Ross v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 46 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““If the actual objection is that a jury may not be reminded that their action is not personal, but involves a public duty, and that their attention may not be called to the disastrous consequences to society in case they should render an erroneous verdict in acquitting a defendant who is guilty, then we must withhold our assent from this statement of the law. The penalties assessed against criminals are intended not only as punishment for the particular crime, but also as examples to deter others from the commission of similar offenses. There is no error in calling the attention of a jury to this principle and thus impressing upon them the importance of a verdict of guilty, if the defendant is so proven. ’ ’”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Aragon · Armstrong v. State

2. “only murder in the second degree, which must be done purposely and maliciously, that is, it must be done with the intent to kill and with malice, or else it is not even murder in the second degree.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Richard Cameron Wilkerson

3. ““A design and determination to kill, distinctly formed in the mind at the time the shot was fired is not sufficient to constitute premeditated malice.” (Italics mine.)”

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