2002 UT App 219 - State v. Comer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 23 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. “'A trial court has broad discretion to admit or exclude evidence and its determination typically will only be disturbed if it constitutes an abuse of disceretion.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. V.K.W. v. State · 2003 UT App 87 - State Ex Rel. Sak

2. “‘domestic violence complaint’ is 'one of the most potentially dangerous, volatile arrest situations confronting police.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Berriel · Brigham City v. Stuart

3. “there was no time to get a warrant and/or that [their] presence was necessary to prevent physical harm to persons or the destruction of evidence.” Id. at ¶ 26. The combination of these factors warranted a finding of exigent circumstances. See id. The holding in Comer, however, should be narrowly construed, see id. at n. 11 (characterizing the Comer opinion as adopting approach”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Brigham City v. Stuart