State v. McDaniel’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

73 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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Certain crimes today are recognized as stemming from a specific emotional propensity for sexual aberration. The fact that in the near past one has given way to unnatural proclivities has a direct bearing upon the ultimate issue whether in the case being tried he is guilty of a particular unnatural act of passion. The importance of establishing this fact far outweighs the prejudicial possibility that the jury might convict for general rather than specific criminality. Even granting the general rule of inadmissibility of evidence of independent crimes to prove the offense charged, many courts recognize a limited exception in the area of sex crimes to prove the nature of the accused’s specific emotional propensity.”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Phillips · Willett v. State

2. ““In the Arizona case of Taylor v. State, 55 Ariz. 13, 19 , 97 P.2d 543, 545 , evidence of acts of sexual relations with girls other than the prosecuting witness was held admissible within the exception pertaining to evidence of similar offenses tending to show '* * * a system, plan or scheme embracing the commission of two or more crimes so related to each other that the proof of one tends to establish the other, * * *.’ “There, evidence of defendant’s system of contact, persuasion and accomplishment of his nefarious purposes was held relevant, though it also tended to prove commission of other crimes. See also, State v. Pierce, 59 Ariz. 411, 414 , 129 P. 2d 916 ; State v. Martinez, 67 Ariz. 389 , 198 P.2d 115 .””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Goldsmith · State v. Little

3. ““It may be admitted that the evidence shows that the boy was ignorantly indifferent and passive in the hands of the defendant, event to the point of submission; but there is a decided difference in law between mere submission and actual consent. Consent, in law, means a voluntary agreement by a person in the possession and exercise of sufficient mentality to make an intelligent choice, to do something proposed by another. ‘Consent’ differs very materially from ‘assent.’ The former implies some positive action and always involves submission. The latter means mere passivity or submission which does not include consent. í|í íj» “In cases of the character under discussion, the age and mentality of the subject of an indecent assault is important, and should always be considered in determining the presence or absence of consent.””

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