State v. Wilson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 71 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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"... Where counsel refers to pertinent facts not before the jury, or appeals to prejudices foreign to the case, it is the duty of the court to stop him then and there. The court need not and ought not to wait to hear objection from opposing counsel. The dignity of the court, the decorum of the trial, the interest of truth and justice forbid license of speech in arguments to jurors outside of the proper scope of professional discussion...." (p. 254.)”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. White · 24 Kan. App. 2d 580 - State v. Price

2. ““It is the duty of the county attorney in a criminal prosecution to see that the state’s case is properly presented with earnestness and vigor, and to use every legitimate means to bring about a just conviction, but he should always bear in mind that he is an officer of the court and, as such, occupies a quasi-judicial position whose sanctions and traditions he should preserve.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 24 Kan. App. 2d 580 - State v. Price · State v. Smith

3. ““ ‘But the testimony of a witness is in a different category. Such is the provision of the statutes and the common law always excluded depositions and written testimony from being carried from the bar by the jury. We can see no reason why the court should depart from the well established rule. It may often happen that the testimony on one side is oral from witnesses produced before the jury, while the testimony for the other side on essential matters is in the form of depositions or in the transcript from testimony at a previous hearing. If the hearing lasts for any length of time and the jury takes the depositions or transcript to be read and discussed while the oral evidence contra has in a measure faded from the memory of the jurors, it is obvious that the side sustained by written evidence is given an undue advantage. The law does not permit depositions or witnesses to go to the jury room. Why should a witness be permitted to go there in the form of written testimony? State v. Moody, 18 Wash. 165 , 51 P. 356 ; Welch v. Insurance Company, 23 W.Va. 288 ; Tabor v. Judd, 62 N.H. 288 .’ ””

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