McCune v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[a] state of violent and uncontrollable rage engendered by a blow or certain other provocation given, which will reduce a homicide from the grade of murder to that of manslaughter. Passion or anger suddenly aroused at the time by some immediate and reasonable provocation, by words or acts of one at the time. The term includes an emotional state of mind characterized by anger, rage, hatred, furious resentment or terror.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bradshaw v. State · Abeyta v. State

2. “In King [v. State, 960 So.2d 413, 429 (¶ 25) (Miss.2007) ], [we] noted that it had: thoroughly addressed the requirements for change of venue in Howell v. State, 860 So.2d 704 (Miss.2003): The right to a fair trial by an impartial jury is guaranteed by both the federal and state constitutions. Johnson v. State, 476 So.2d 1195, 1208 (Miss.1985) (citing U.S. Const. Amend. VI and Miss. Const, art. 3, § 26). “The accused has a right to a change of venue when it is doubtful that an impartial jury can be obtained.” Davis v. State, 767 So.2d 986, 993 (Miss.2000) [ (]citing White v. State, 495 So.2d 1346, 1348 (Miss.1986)[) ] “Upon proper application, there arises a presumption that such sentiment exists; and, the state then bears the burden of rebutting that presumption.” Johnson, 476 So.2d at 1211 . [We] enumerated “certain elements which, when present would serve as an indicator to the trial court as to when the presumption is irrebuta-ble.” White, 495 So.2d at 1349 . The elements are as follows: (1) capital cases based on considerations of a heightened standard of review; (2) crowds threatening violence toward the accused; (3) an inordinate amount of media coverage, 7 particularly in cases of: (a) serious crimes against influential families; (b) serious crimes against public officials; (c) serial crimes; (d) crimes committed by a black defendant upon a white victim; (e) where there is an inexperienced trial counsel. Id.; Davis, 767 So.2d at 993-94 . Howell, 860 So.2d at 719 . Kin”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 73 So. 3d 1203 - Wells v. State

3. ““[l]esser included offense instructions should be given if there is an evidentiary basis in the record that would permit a jury rationally to find the defendant guilty of the lesser offense and to acquit him of the greater offense.” [ 10 ] Welch v. State, 566 So.2d 680, 684 (Miss.1990). In reviewing the propriety of such an instruction, we have stated: [a] lesser-included offense instruction should be granted unless the trial judge and ultimately this Court can say, taking the evidence in the light most favorable to the accused and considering all the reasonable inferences which may be drawn in favor of the accused from the evidence, that no reasonable jury could find the defendant guilty of the lesser-included offense (conversely, not guilty of at least one element of the principal charge). McGowan v. State, 541 So.2d 1027, 1028 (Miss.1989). However, this Court has repeatedly held that a lesser-included offense instruction should not be indiscriminately granted, but rather should be submitted to the jury only where there is an evidentiary basis in the record. Lee v. State, 469 So.2d 1225, 1230 (Miss.1985).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 10 So. 3d 913 - Wallace v. State