Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 925 NE2D 369 - Jackson v. State

Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2010

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Benton v. Maryland · Arizona v. Washington · United States v. Josef Perez · McHenry v. State · Wright v. State

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

  1. “We think, that in all cases of this nature, the law has invested Courts of justice with the authority to discharge a jury from giving any verdict, whenever, in their opinion, taking all the circumstances into consideration, there is a manifest necessity for the act, or the ends of public justice would otherwise be defeated. They are to exercise a sound discretion on the subject; and it is impossible to define all the circumstances, which would render it proper to interfere. To be sure, the power ought to be used with the greatest caution, under urgent circumstances, and for very plain and obvious causes; and, in capital cases especially, Courts should be extremely careful how they interfere with any of the chances of life, in favour of the prisoner. But, after all, they have the right to order the discharge; and the security which the public have for the faithful, sound, and conscientious exercise of this discretion, rests, in this, as in other cases, upon the responsibility of the Judges, under their oaths of office....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[mJlany different factors may bear on the need for a mistrial. First, it is significant whether the reason for the mistrial is attributable to the prosecution. If so, the State must demonstrate a "much higher" degree of necessity for the mistrial.... The necessity of a mistrial is also evaluated in light of the steps taken by the trial court to avoid a mistrial. The burden imposed by a mistrial is also relevant....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “and argued before the trial court that a mistrial was inappropriate because the jurors exposed to the article all attested that they were not influenced by it,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.