Matson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

351 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 351 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “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.”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. In Re LAS · Nazemi v. State

2. “The court is never to make its own myopic determination of guilt from reading the cold record. It is not the reviewing court’s duty to disregard, realign or weigh evidence. This the factfinder has already done. The factfinder, best positioned to consider all the evidence firsthand, viewing the valuable and significant demeanor and expression of the witnesses, has reached a verdict beyond a reasonable doubt. Such a verdict must stand unless it is found to be irrational or unsupported by ... the evidence, with such evidence being viewed under the Jackson light. Concrete application of the Jackson standard is made by resolving inconsistencies in the testimony in favor of the verdict, (footnote omitted)”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Monreal v. State · Bogan v. State

3. “... the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments require that the sentencer, in all but the rarest kind of capital case, [footnote omitted] not be precluded from considering, as a mitigating factor, any aspect of a defendant's character or record and any of the circumstances of the offense that the defendant proffers as a basis for a sentence less than death. [Emphasis in original.]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. First v. State · Rachal v. State