State v. Beasley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

28 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “no warrant was required for a reasonable search incident to a valid arrest” (citations omitted)); Ray v. Arkansas, 304 Ark. 489 , 803 S.W.2d 894, 899 (1991) (”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State of West Virginia v. Rashaun R. Boyd and Christopher R. Wyche · Jones v. State

2. “Rule 609(a) allows the impeachment of a testifying defendant with a prior conviction if the trial court determines “the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect.” In contrast, Rule 403 allows the trial court to exclude evidence if “its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.” Thus, under Rule 609, the defendant is not required to demonstrate that the prejudice of the impeachment is “unfair” or that the prejudice of the impeachment “substantially” outweighs its probative value.”

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

3. “the search of the defendant's person by swabbing for gunshot residue after arrest was reasonable”); State v. Kyger, 787 S.W.2d 13, 21 (Tenn.Crim.App.1989) (”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2016 Pa. Super. 207 - Commonwealth v. Simonson