State v. White’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 21 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either [a] to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Myers · State v. Scroggie

2. ““No. [14] “ ‘The law presumes that all men are sane and responsible for their acts. In this case, the defendant has interposed the defense of insanity. The law does not place upon [him] the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that [he] was insane at the time the act charged was committed, but only places the burden upon [him] to raise in your minds a reasonable doubt as to the sanity of the defendant at the time of the commission of the act alleged in the information. If you have such doubt, then this reasonable doubt must be resolved in [his] favor and you must acquit [him] of the crime charged.’ ” (Quoted from State v. White, supra, 93 Idaho at 155, 156, 456 P.2d at 799 .) “No. [15] “ ‘The defendant has interposed insanity as a defense. The law presumes that a defendant is sane. This presumption is rebuttable. Where evidence has been introduced that a defendant suffered a mental disease or defect at the time of the commission of the crime charged, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not have a mental disease or defect or that, despite some mental disease or defect, [he] had substantial capacity both to appreciate the wrongfulness of [his] conduct and to conform [his] conduct to the requirements of the law.’ ” (Quoted from State v. White, supra, at 93 Idaho 155 , 456 P.2d 799 .) “No. [16] “ ‘Insanity as used in these instructions means a mental disease or defect which causes lack of substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrong”

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

3. “The theory of diminished responsibility is unsatisfactory for our purposes both because it is overbroad and because the consequences of its application are different. It is overbroad because it includes not only mental diseases or defects but any state which prevents the formation of mens rea, e.g., intoxication. Its consequence is not to exclude criminal responsibility, as would the application of the A.L.I. test, but simply to reduce the level of criminal responsibility.”

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