Biedermann v. Wasatch County’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “We 'presume that the legislature used each word advisedly and read each term according to its ordinary and accepted meaning.' " (citation omitted) ). A threat of retaliation, or a threat to retaliate, would be a threat to retaliate in the future. If the person making the threat does not intend it to reach the subject of the threat, then it cannot be said that the person made the threat as retaliation. As, Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (10th ed. 1998). See supra ¶21. When the witness retaliation statute is interpreted in this way, Mr. Trujillo did not make a threat as retaliation against the neighbors. He either made a threat as retaliation against the police, or he made a threat to retaliate against the neighbors in the future. Neither theory was the basis for Mr. Trujillo's conviction in this case. We note that the language of the statute encompasses threats directed against "a witness”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Trujillo

2. “accept the factual allegations in the complaint as true and consider them and all reasonable inferences to be drawn from them in a light most favorable to the plaintiff.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Blanch v. Farrell

3. “term has more than one ordinary meaning, we interpret it 'based upon the context in which it is used'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Trujillo