State v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A conviction cannot be had on the testimony of one responsible or legally accountable for the same offense . . . unless the testimony is corroborated by other evidence which in itself and without the aid of the testimony of the one responsible or legally accountable for the same offense tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense. The corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the offense or the circumstances thereof.””

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

2. “the State [was] attempting to use, not a previous statement by the defendant to corroborate an accomplice, but a previous statement of the accomplice. Consequently, if we were to allow the testimony to be used as corroboration evidence, we would in effect be allowing a prior statement made by an accomplice to corroborate his own testimony. Such a result would frustrate the purpose of the statute and will not be permitted. [Id. at 1158.]”

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

3. ““where the connecting evidence ‘shows no more than an opportunity to commit a crime, simply proves suspicion, or is equally consonant with the reasonable explanation pointing toward innocent conduct on the part of the defendant, the evidence is to be deemed insufficient.’ ””

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