State v. Weisser’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

30 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “unless the corpus delicti of the offense charged has been otherwise established, a conviction cannot be sustained solely on [the] extrajudicial confessions or admissions of the accused”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 1 N.M. Ct. App. 600 - State v. Ballard · State v. OWELICIO

2. “evidence establishing the trustworthiness of [Defendant's] confession”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 1 N.M. Ct. App. 600 - State v. Ballard · State v. OWELICIO

3. “[ujnder the trustworthiness doctrine, “corroborative evidence need not be sufficient, independent of the [defendant’s] statements, to establish the corpus delicti.” Opper, 348 U.S. at 93 , 75 S.Ct. 158 .... Instead, “[i]t is sufficient if the corroboration supports the essential facts admitted sufficiently to justify a jury inference of their truth.” Id. Further, “ ‘[t]here is no necessity that [the] proof [independent of the defendant’s confession] touch the corpus delicti at all.’” [State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 , 337 S.E.2d 487, 492 (1985) ] (alteration in original) (quoting Opper, 348 U.S. at 92 [ 75 S.Ct. 158 ] ...). Rather, “proof of any corroborating circumstances is adequate which goes to fortify the truth of the confession or tends to prove facts embraced in the confession.” Opper 348 U.S. at 92 [ 75 S.Ct. 158 ] ...; see also United States v. Johnson, 589 F.2d 716, 718-19 (D.C.Cir.1978) (stating that under the trustworthiness doctrine, “the adequacy of corroborating proof is measured not by its tendency to establish the corpus delicti but by the extent to which it supports the trustworthiness of the [defendant’s] admissions”).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Wilson