Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 federal appellate · 35 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “This Court has held that where there is no error present, there can be no accumulation of error. However, when there have been numerous irregularities during the course of the trial that tend to prejudice the rights of the defendant, reversal will be required if the cumulative effect of all the errors was to deny the defendant a fair trial.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Wackerly v. State · Lockett v. State

2. “[Mr. Smith] was married to Jennifer Smith, who had four children from a prior relationship: ten year old Sheme-ka Carter, nine year old Glen Carter, Jr., seven year old Ladarian Carter, and six year old Kanesha Carter. The children lived with [Mr. and Mrs. Smith]. On the morning of June 28, 1993, [Mrs. Smith’s] mother called the police and asked them to check her daughter’s house. She had not seen or heard from [Mrs. Smith] since June 18,1993. When Officer Peterson arrived at the [Smith] residence ..., the house appeared to be secured and no one answered the doors. Because he noticed an odor of decaying flesh and a large number of flies around the windows, he contacted his supervisor, Lieutenant Wayne Owen, who came to the address. Owen and Peterson entered the house through a window. Inside, they discovered a dead woman in one closet and a dead child in another. They called the homicide division of the Oklahoma City Police Department and secured the house. Once homicide detectives arrived, the rest of the house was searched. The bodies of three more children were found, two in closets and a third under a bed. The bodies were determined to be those of Jennifer Smith and her four children. They were determined to have been dead for at least two to three days and up to ... two weeks or more. The afternoon of that same day, ... [Mr. Smith] walked into the Oklahoma County Sheriffs Office. He was turned over to the Oklahoma City Police and placed under arrest. During a custodial i”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Smith v. Mullin

3. “Mindful of the lack of finality in this area of the law, this Court reaffirms its position that unadjudicated offenses may be introduced during the second stage of a capital trial to support the aggravating circumstance of “continuing threat”. Prior adjudicated cases resulting in convictions for violent felony offenses support a separate aggravator, “prior violent felony”. However, proof of the “continuing threat” aggra-vator is much more than prior convictions; it is the circumstances surrounding the murder for which the defendant has just been convicted and his prior criminal conduct. This is the primary evidence the State must prove to find the “continuing threat” aggravator. Evidence of a defendant’s criminal history is relevant to the jury’s determination as to whether the defendant is likely to commit future acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society. Having such evidence for consideration focuses the jury’s sentencing determination on the particularized circumstances of the offense and the individual offender. To find the use of unadju-dicated offenses improper is a backdoor attempt to find the aggravator unconstitutional contrary to decisions by the United States Supreme Court. Denial of the evidence deprives the government of the. ability to prove a constitutional aggravating circumstance.”

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