State v. Mauchley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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. “[W]e think the better rule to be that the corroborative evidence need not be sufficient, independent of the statements, to establish the corpus delicti. It is necessary, therefore, to require the Government to introduce substantial independent evidence which would tend to establish the trustworthiness of the statement. Thus, the independent evidence serves a dual function. It tends to make the admission reliable, thus corroborating it[,] while also establishing independently the other necessary elements of the offense. It is sufficient if the corroboration supports the essential facts admitted sufficiently to justify a jury inference of their truth. Those facts plus the other evidence besides the admission must, of course, be sufficient to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State of Tennessee v. Courtney Bishop · 50 Kan. App. 2d 208 - State v. McGill

2. “before a confession may be admitted, the trial court must determine as a matter of law that the confession is trustworthy.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. P.G. v. State · P.G. v. State

3. “deemed trustworthy by a preponderance of the evidence.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. P.G. v. State · P.G. v. State