Taggart v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[An appellate court] will reverse the trial court’s denial of a motion for a new trial only if, by doing so, the court abused its discretion. We will not order a new trial unless convinced that the verdict is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that, to allow it to stand, would be to sanction an unconscionable injustice. This [c]ourt has also explained that factual disputes are properly resolved by a jury and do not mandate a new trial.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jeremy Wade Holloway v. State of Mississippi · Perkins v. State

2. “In all cases not involving the death penalty, wherein the jury may impose life sentence, the court may conduct a bifurcated trial. If the defendant is found guilty of an offense for which life imprisonment may be imposed, a sentencing trial shall be held before the same jury, if possible, or before the court if jury waiver is allowed by the court. At the sentencing hearing: 1. The state may introduce evidence of aggravation of the offense of which the defendant has been adjudged guilty. 2. The defendant may introduce any evidence of extenuation or mitigation. 3. The state may introduce evidence in rebuttal of the evidence of the defendant. 4. A record shall be made of the above proceeding and shall be maintained in the office of the clerk of the trial court as a part of the record in that court.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 965 So. 2d 686 - Jackson v. State

3. “The appropriate inquiry on appeal in considering the trial court’s denial of a JNOV motion is whether the evidence shows beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the act charged, and that he did so under such circumstances that every element of the offense existed; and where the evidence fails to meet this test it is insufficient to support a conviction— The prosecution must be given the benefit of all favorable inferences that may reasonably be drawn from the evidence. Matters regarding the weight and credibility to be accorded the evidence are resolved by the jury. We may reverse only where, with respect to one or more of the elements of the offense charged, the evidence so considered is such that reasonable and fair-minded jurors could only find the accused not guilty.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Jeremy Wade Holloway v. State of Mississippi