State v. McGirk’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Judge Fleming’s testimony shows that,' by virtue of [defendant] having twice appeared before him on charges of violent crime, [defendant] knew or should have known that Judge Fleming had some reason to suspect [defendant] was capable of being violent. Evidence of prior bad acts is inadmissible for the purpose of showing the propensity of the defendant to commit those acts. State v. Morrison, 980 S.W.2d 332, 334 (Mo.App.1998). However, evidence of prior bad acts is admissible if it is logically and legally relevant and tends to establish motive, intent, absence of mistake or accident, or a common plan or scheme. Id. [Defendant’s] prior charges for assault and unlawM use of a weapon are relevant to the extent they infer that [defendant] believed Judge Fleming would take him seriously and would be influenced by his threat. Thus, the evidence of prior charges tends to establish that [defendant’s] motive and intent for saying “I’ll take care of you” was to alarm the Judge with the purpose of intimidating or influencing him. It tends to show that [defendant] acted with purpose.”

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

2. “does not prohibit a statement merely because it happens to alarm the person to whom it is directed. Rather, it prohibits that statement only if its speaker made it with a purpose to harass, intimidate or influence the person in the context of a judicial proceeding. The plain meaning of the words of the statute is that it prohibits speech only to the ex tent that it offends the State’s legitimate interest in securing its judicial proceedings.”

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

3. “1. A person commits the offense of tampering with a judicial officer if, with the purpose to harass, intimidate or influence a judicial officer in the performance of such officer's official duties, such person: (1) Threatens or causes harm to such judicial officer or members of such judicial officer's family[. 2 ]”

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