State v. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 17 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Defendant never suggested any defense of alibi at trial, and we find that all of the counts were set forth with sufficient specificity to allow him to prepare his defense and to protect him from double jeopardy.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Taylor · Covington v. State

2. “[T]he information need only be specific enough to enable the defendant to prepare his defense and to protect him from being subsequently prosecuted for the same offense. See, e.g., State v. Gumm, 99 Idaho 549 , 585 P.2d 959 (1978). Any other rule would too often preclude prosecutions in this type of case where the victims are minors and where the crimes are not discovered until some time after their commission. As we noted in State v. Rogers, 48 Idaho 567, 570 , 283 P. 44, 45 (1929), quoting the attorney general, “[i]t would be a very weak rule of law that would permit a man to ravish a fifteen year old girl ... and then say in effect: “You cannot convict me of this crime, as you did not guess the right date.’””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Tapia

3. “The precise time at which the offense was committed need not be stated in the indictment; but it may be alleged to have been committed at any time before the finding thereof, except where the time is a material ingredient in the offense.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Taylor