State v. Ashworth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 93 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 105 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A defendant is mentally competent to forgo the presentation of mitigating evidence in the penalty phase of a capital case if he has the mental capacity to understand the choice between life and death and to make a knowing and intelligent decision not to pursue the presentation of evidence. The defendant must fully comprehend the ramifications of his decision, and must possess the ability to reason logically, ie., to choose the means that relate logically to his ends.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Kiser · State v. Bethel, 07ap-810 (6-5-2008)

2. “We now hold that in a capital case, when a defendant wishes to waive the presentation of all mitigating evidence, a trial court must conduct an inquiry of the defendant on the record to determine whether the waiver is knowing and voluntary. The trial court must decide whether the defendant is competent and whether the defendant understands his or her rights both in the plea process and in the sentencing proceedings. (Citations omitted). The trial court must inform the defendant of the right to present mitigating evidence and explain what mitigating evidence is. The court must then inquire of the defendant, and make a determination on the record, whether the defendant understands the importance of mitigating evidence, the use of such evidence to offset the aggravating circumstances, and the effect of failing to present that evidence. After being assured that the defendant understands these concepts, the court must inquire whether the defendant desires to waive the right to present mitigating evidence, and, finally, the court must make findings of fact as to the defendant’s understanding and waiver of rights. (Citation omitted).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 624 F. Supp. 2d 709 - Cowans v. Bagley · Billy Ray Battenfield v. Gary Gibson Warden Oklahoma State Penitentiary

3. “a trial court must conduct an inquiry of the defendant on the record to determine whether the waiver is knowing and voluntary.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 153 Ohio St. 3d 422 - State v. Clinton · State v. Woods