State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 81 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 85 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “No indictment or information shall be deemed invalid, nor shall the trial, judgment or other proceedings thereon be ... in any manner affected: [[Image here]] (14) For any surplusage or repugnant allegation, when there is sufficient matter alleged to indicate the crime and person charged; nor [[Image here]] (18) For any other defect or imperfection which does not tend to the prejudice of the substantial rights of the defendant upon the merits.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Bradshaw · State v. Nelson

2. “INSTRUCTION NO. 18 The law applicable to this stage of the trial is stated in these instructions and Instructions No. 1 and 2 which the Court read to you during the first stage of the trial. All of these instructions will be given to you to take to your jury room for use during your deliberations on punishment. You must not single out certain instructions and disregard others or question the wisdom of any rule of law. The Court does not mean to assume as true any fact referred to in these instructions but leaves it to you to determine what the facts are. In these instructions, you are told that, in order to consider the death penalty, you must find beyond a reasonable doubt certain propositions relating to aggravating circumstances. The burden of causing you to find these propositions beyond a reasonable doubt is upon the state. A reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon reason and common sense after careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence in the case. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the truth of a proposition. The law does not require proof that overcomes every possible doubt. If, after your consideration of all the evidence, you are firmly convinced that a proposition is true, then you may so find. If you are not so convinced, you must give the defendant the benefit of the doubt and must not find such proposition to be true.”

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

3. “All persons are presumed to be free of mental disease or defect excluding responsibility for their conduct .... The issue of whether any person had a mental disease or defect excluding responsibility for such person’s conduct is one for the trier of fact to decide upon the introduction of substantial evidence of lack of such responsibility. But in the absence of such evidence, the presumption shall be conclusive. Upon the introduction of substantial evidence of lack of such responsibility, the presumption shall not disappear and shall alone be sufficient to take that issue to the trier of fact. The jury shall be instructed as to the existence and nature of such presumption when requested by the state and, where the issue of such responsibility is one for the jury to decide, the jury shall be told that the burden rests upon the accused to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant was suffering from a mental disease or defect excluding responsibility at the time of the conduct charged against the defendant.”

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