Lamb v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The purpose of jury voir dire is to discover whether a juror will consider and decide the facts impartially and conscientiously apply the law as charged by the court.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. KHOURY VS. SEASTRAND C/W 65007/65172 · THOMAS (MARLO) v. STATE (DEATH PENALTY-PC)

2. “), and disagree. We conclude that the district court did not err in denying appellant's motion for a mistrial because the marshal's communications with the juror neither related to the evidence nor the marshal's opinion regarding the case, but rather involved safety concerns that were within the purview of the marshal's security duties. See NRS 3.310(3) (providing that a court marshal is charged with”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Richardson (Gregory) Vs. State

3. “Decisions concerning the scope of voir dire and the manner in which it is conducted are reviewable only for abuse of discretion and draw considerable deference on appeal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 140 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 42 - MARISCAL-OCHOA (MANUEL) v. STATE