State v. Haanio’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 44 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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]rial courts must instruct juries as to any included offenses when `there is a rational basis in the evidence for a verdict acquitting the defendant of the offense charged and convicting the defendant of the included offense.'”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. DRIESSEN · Batalona v. State.

2. “A trial court's failure to inform the jury of its option to find the defendant guilty of the lesser offense would impair the jury's truth-ascertainment function. Consequently, neither the prosecution nor the defense should be allowed, based on their trial strategy, to preclude the jury from considering guilt of a lesser offense included in the crime charged. To permit this would force the jury to make an "all or nothing" choice between conviction of the crime charged or complete acquittal, thereby denying the jury the opportunity to decide whether the defendant is guilty of a lesser included offense established by the evidence.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Magbulos · Flores v. State

3. “in jury trials beginning after the filing date of this opinion, the trial courts shall instruct juries as to any included offenses having a rational basis in the evidence” and noting that prospective application of the new rule”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Magbulos · State v. Cabagbag