State v. Six’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

75 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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “has discretion during the punishment phase of trial to admit whatever evidence it deems helpful to the jury in assessing punishment.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Kinder · State v. Anderson

2. “INSTRUCTION NO. 6 In determining the punishment to be assessed against Brown for the murder of Janet Perkins, you must first unanimously determine whether one or more of the following aggravating circumstances exists: Whether Brown was convicted of Assault and Battery With the Intent To Gratify Sexual Desires on June 28,1973 in the Criminal Court of Marion County of Indiana. Whether the murder of Janet Perkins involved torture or depravity of mind and that as a result thereof it was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible, or inhuman. Whether the murder of Janet Perkins was committed for the purpose avoiding, interfering with, or preventing a lawful arrest or custody in a place of lawful confinement of Brown. Whether Janet Perkins was a potential witness in the investigation of an assault of Janet Perkins and was killed as a result of her status as a potential witness. Whether the murder of Janet Perkins was committed while the defendant was engaged in the perpetration of or the attempt to perpetrate rape, sodomy or kidnapping. [[Image here]] ... if you do not unanimously find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that at least one of the foregoing circumstances exists, you must return a verdict fixing punishment of the defendant at imprisonment for life by the Division of Corrections without eligibility for probation or parole. INSTRUCTION NO. 7 If you have found beyond a reasonable doubt that one or more of the aggravating circumstances submitted in Instruction No. 6 ”

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

3. “The trial court has discretion to admit whatever evidence it deems helpful to the jury in assessing punishment. The jury may consider not only the nature and circumstances of the crime but also the character of the defendant. The trial judge in this case made clear the fact that he was admitting the wording of the bumper sticker under his broad discretion to admit evidence in the punishment phase. He believed the evidence relevant to defendant's character. The alleged significance of the bumper sticker did not go unchallenged. Appellant adduced testimony from his sister that the sticker was on the car when purchased. The bumper sticker was evidence of the representations appellant chose to make about himself whether he placed the sticker on the bumper or merely did not remove it after purchase. It was for the jury to determine the weight of the evidence. Appellant's argument is further weakened by the fact that the trial judge sentenced appellant and is presumed not to have been affected in sentencing by arguably prejudicial evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 885 F. Supp. 1265 - Six v. Delo