People v. McIntyre’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 65 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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) “Testimony as to any particular fact which you believe given by one witness is sufficient for the proof of that fact. However, before finding any fact required to be established by the prosecution to be proved solely by the testimony of such a single witness, you should carefully review all the testimony upon which the proof of such fact depends.” (CALJIC No. 2.27 (4th ed. 1986 rev.), italics added; see Rincon-Pineda, supra, 14 Cal.3d at p. 885 ); 2 and (following 25 intervening instructions), (2) “It is not essential to a conviction of a charge of rape that the testimony of the witness with whom sexual intercourse is alleged to have been committed be corroborated by other evidence.” (Former CALJIC No. 10.21 (4th ed. 1970 rev.) (now CALJIC No. 10.60 (5th ed.)).) 3”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2 Cal. 4th 693 - People v. Gammage

2. ““Permitting a jury to operate under the misconception corroboration is required would put the value of the victim’s testimony on a level below that of the defendant’s testimony, credibility aside, and that is not the law. We hold CAUIC 10.21 is proper in combination with CAL-JIC 2.27.” 7”

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

3. ““It is not essential to a conviction of a charge of [rape] [unlawful sexual intercourse] that the testimony of the witness with whom sexual intercourse is alleged to have been committed be corroborated by other evidence.””

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