Todd v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 2019
12 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 Blockburger v. United States · North Carolina v. Pearce · Benton v. Maryland · Brown v. Ohio · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“of state courts that analyzed the constitutional issue on the basis of the intent of the state legislature had upheld separate punishments for felony murder and the underlying felony. Todd, supra at 679 . [11] In Greco , the Connecticut Supreme Court articulated the distinct interests protected by the respective statutes at issue: An obvious purpose of the felony murder statute, or any murder statute, is to protect human life. In contrast,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Subsection (e) was referred to at the Criminal Law Subeommission meetings as the “felony-murder merger doctrine.” In considering this extremely limited exemption from the felony-murder rule, it must be recalled that the purpose of the rule is to diminish the risk of unintentional or even accidental killings during the commission of violent felonies. One of these felonies, burglary in the first degree, occurs when a person enters a dwelling with intent to commit a crime. If a person commits burglary in the first degree by breaking into a house with intent to kill the occupant, the felony-murder rule would have no deterrent effect. Permitting a conviction for murder under the felony-murder rule in this circumstance would also have the effect of preventing the jury from considering whether the defendant acted in the “heat of passion.” The Code does not permit a conviction for felony-murder in this situation; the felony is said to “merge” with the homicide. Of course, the defendant can still be charged with first or second degree murder for the intentional killing. The effect of the felony-murder merger doctrine is to prohibit a second-degree murder conviction solely on proof that the defendant committed first degree burglary by entering a dwelling with intent to kill the occupant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Todd v. State“In considering the Revised Code’s approach to the felony murder statute, it must be recalled that the purpose of a felony murder rule is to deter all killings during the commission of felonies which involve a high potential for violence. By holding the felon liable for an unintended and even accidental death occurring in the course of or in furtherance of a felony, the rule provides a powerful incentive not to commit inherently dangerous crimes, or at the very least to plan and carry out such crimes with increased regard for physical dangers. For all practical purposes, Alaska does not now have a felony murder rule.... Consequently, an accidental killing occurring during the commission of an enumerated felony does not render the actor guilty of felony murder under the existing statute. Subsection (a)(3) [the felony murder provision] specifically eliminates the Gray requirement that a felon “purposely” kill during the commission of an enumerated felony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Todd v. State
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.