Yung v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

39 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Yung argues that when a defendant is charged with second-degree murder and raises heat of passion as an affirmative defense, the State must prove that the killing was not accomplished in the heat of passion. In support of this argument, Yung cites, among other eases, Mullaney v. Wilbur, 421 U.S. 684 , 95 S.Ct. 1881 , 44 L.Ed.2d 508 (1975). We begin our analysis by noting that heat of passion is not normally referred to as an affirmative defense. See Black’s Law Dictionary at 60 (6th ed.1990). In fact, in Wyoming, heat of passion is an element of the crime of voluntary manslaughter. State v. Keffer, 860 P.2d 1118, 1137 (Wyo.1993). Yung’s apparent theory of the case is that he killed Bennett in the heat of passion and is, therefore, guilty of voluntary manslaughter rather than second-degree murder. We will refer to Yung’s heat of passion defense as a defense theory rather than as an affirmative defense. In Mullaney , the United States Supreme Court held that the Maine Supreme Judicial Court could not presume implied malice aforethought and require a defendant to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he acted in a heat of passion in order to reduce a murder charge to manslaughter. Mullaney, 421 U.S. at 688, 703 , 95 S.Ct. at 1884, 1892 . Under this scheme, the defendant was essentially required to disprove an element of the crime. Id. at 702-03 n.31, 95 S.Ct. at 1891 n.31. Mullaney does not apply here because in Wyoming, the prosecution is required to prove, beyond a r”

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

2. “"Heat of passion" means such passion as naturally would be aroused in the mind of an ordinarily reasonable person in the same or similar cireumstances as those in question which would cause him to act rashly, without reflection and deliberation, and from passion rather than from judgment.”

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

3. “Evidence is sufficient to support a conviction if, when viewed in the light most favorable to the state, that evidence supports a reasonable inference of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”

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