Farris v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

61 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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A] reviewing court, `... faced with a record of historical facts that supports conflicting inferences' must presume—even if it does not affirmatively appear in the record—that the trier of fact resolved any such conflict in favor of the prosecution, and must defer to that resolution.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Monreal v. State · Tilbury v. State

2. “Prosecutor: Okay. Question two is a little bit more difficult. If you can go ahead and read along with me as I read the question. Question two says whether there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society. Now, you are being asked to look at the defendant’s past behavior and decide probabilities, which means is there a chance, is there a likelihood that he is dangerous, that he poses a threat to society, that he will commit acts of violence on society. Do you follow so far? Venireman: Yes, ma’am. Prosecutor: Now, it doesn’t mean you have to be 100 percent sure, because nobody is 100 percent sure of anything, and so you can deal with probabilities. Now, sometimes you can have the past criminal history of a person and you find that he has a criminal record. Let’s say that you find he has been to prison once before for a similar act, for stealing or something. Let’s say that you find out he is on probation for a drug offense. Those are facts that you have to consider to be able to answer question two. Now, my question to you, Mr. [name], is can you and will you answer question two based on the facts that you hear? Venireman: Yes, ma’am. Prosecutor: Okay, and if the State convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt to answer question two yes, will you answer it yes, knowing the death penalty will be imposed? Venireman: No, ma’am. Prosecutor: Okay, you said you would not answer it yes? Do you want me ”

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

3. “Q. I presume then that you are opposed to capital punishment? A. Yes I am. Q. And I will repeat that question one more time and this is important for the record in this case. Could you, under any circumstances as a juror in a criminal case, vote to return the death penalty? A. No.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 967 F. Supp. 200 - Farris v. Johnson