State v. Bischoff’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Ordinarily, a negative averment has not to be proved, and often cannot be. The negation is not susceptible of proof other than by proof of the affirmative fact which is denied. The negation here is that knowledge of the crime was not brought to a public officer of requisite authority. The proof must be of the affirmative fact, that such knowledge was thus brought to him. Upon whom is the onus? It must rest on the party who can most conveniently and most certainly make the proof. Now an affirmative can more certainly, naturally, and logically be proved than a negative. If the onus is on the state, then it must prove that knowledge was not brought to any of its officers who' had authority to investigate the crime. It must prove a universal negative. If the onus is on the defendant, he need only prove that knowledge was brought to one of such officers. He need only prove a particular affirmative.” State v. Barrow, 31 La. Ann. 694 ; State v. Barfield, 36 La. Ann. 89 .”

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

2. ““We have uniformly held that, unless the indictment or information negatived prescription on its face (that is, if the offense was committed more than 12 months prior to the finding of the bill), no offense was charged.””

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