United States v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 2 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Congress did not enact Rule 704(b) so as to limit the flow of diagnostic and clinical information. Every actual fact concerning the defendant’s mental condition is still as admissible after the enactment of Rule 704(b) as it was before.... Rather, the Rule ‘changes the style of question and answer that can be used to establish both the offense and the defense thereto.’ ... The prohibition is directed at a narrowly and precisely defined evil: When, however, ‘ultimate issue’ questions are formulated by the law and put to the expert witness who must then say ‘yea’ or ‘nay,’ then the expert witness is required to make a leap in logic. He no longer addresses himself to medical concepts but instead must infer or intuit what is in fact unspeakable, namely, the, probable relationship between medical concepts and legal or moral constructs such as free will. These impermissible leaps in logic made by expert witnesses confuse the jury.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Clements · United States of America v. Angelina Didomenico

2. ““The legislative history of the adoption of Rule 704(b) demonstrates that Congress did have a compelling governmental interest in mind when enacting the 1984 amendments: The purpose of this amendment is to eliminate the confusing spectacle of competing expert witnesses testifying to directly contradictory conclusions as to the ultimate legal issue to be found by the trier of fact. Under this proposal, expert psychiatric testimony would be limited to presenting and explaining their diagnoses, such as whether the defendant had a severe mental disease or defect and what the characteristics of such a disease or defect, if any, may have been.” (Emphasis in original.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Clements

3. “Congress did not enact Rule 704(b) so as to limit the flow of diagnostic and clinical information. Every actual fact concerning the defendant's mental condition is still as admissible after the enactment of Rule 704(b) as it was before. Rather, the Rule 'changes the style of question and answer that can be used to establish both the offense and the defense thereto.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States of America v. Angelina Didomenico