State v. Sorenson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The Confrontation Clause of the U.S. Const. amend. VI, states that ‘[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him.... ’ In Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 68 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004), the United States Supreme Court held the Sixth Amendment prohibits the admission of testimonial hearsay against the accused, unless the witness is unavailable to testify and the accused had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the declarant. The Confrontation Clause does not apply to non-testimonial hearsay. Id. See also Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813, 821 , 126 S.Ct. 2266 , 165 L.Ed.2d 224 (2006) (only testimonial statements cause the declar-ant to be a ‘witness’ within the meaning of the Sixth Amendment).””

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