2007 UT App 273 - State v. Leber’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[Wle note that a self-defense claim generally does not put character at issue.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Leber · 2009 UT App 226 - State v. Patrick

2. “[0]n cross-examination inquiry is allowable as to whether the reputation witness has heard of particular instances of conduct pertinent to the trait in question. The theory is that, since the reputation witnesses relates what he has heard, the inquiry tends to shed light on the accuracy of his hearing and reporting. Accordingly, the opinion witness would be asked whether he knew, as well as whether he had heard.”

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

3. “essential element of a charge, claim, or defense.” Mangrum & Benson’s treatise accurately indicates that in a criminal case ”[c]haracter is seldom an element of a claim or defense” and”

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