Humanik v. Beyer’s Empirical Analysis
871 F.2d 432 · 1989
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably Lambert v. Blackwell (2004), State v. Galloway (1993)
15 federal appellate · 28 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Sandstrom v. Montana · Mullaney v. Wilbur · Cupp v. Naughten · Patterson v. New York
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a rational juror attempting to attribute some significance to the instruction [to] conclude that the defendant's evidence [on state of mind] should be considered only if the juror finds it to be more likely true than not true.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Oglesby · State v. Reyes“Evidence that the defendant suffered from a mental disease or defect is admissible whenever it is relevant to prove that the defendant did not have a state of mind which is an element of the offense. In the absence of such evidence, it may be presumed that the defendant had no mental disease or defect which would negate a state of mind which is an element of the offense. Mental disease or defect is an affirmative defense which must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“You are not bound by any opinion you might think the attorneys or the judge have expressed concerning guilt or innocence, credibility of witnesses, weight of evidence, facts proven by the evidence, or inferences to be drawn from those facts____ If however your judgment of what the evidence proves and inferences to be drawn from the facts established to your satisfaction differs from what is suggested by the attorneys or by the court you will follow your own judgment and not the suggestion of anyone else, including the attorneys or the judge. Furthermore, a defendant is presumed innocent throughout the trial and unless and until you conclude based on an impartial consideration of the evidence that the Commonwealth has proved him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and of course that applies as to each of the matters you will be considering____ It is the Commonwealth that always has the burden of proving each and every element of the crime charged ... and that the defendant is guilty of that crime or crimes beyond a reasonable doubt____ The person accused of a crime or crimes is not required to present evidence or present anything in his own defense____ If a person intends to kill, the intention is to be gathered from all the circumstances surrounding the act as from the character and type of weapon used, from the part of the body on which it is to be used, and what was said at the time or immediately after by the person committing the act, and all of the circumstances that throw”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.