State v. Suing’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ . . In view of the practical impossibility of obtaining photographs which perfectly represent their subject, it would seem that when the courts state that one offering photographs in evidence should prove that they are accurate and correct, they really mean that it must be shown merely that the photographs are sufficiently correct to be helpful to the court and jury.’ (Emphasis added.) In keeping with this thought is our statement in Howard v. Stoughton, 199 Kan. 787 , 433 P.2d 567 , Syl. ¶ 1, that relevant photographs may be admissible ‘if shown to be a likeness of what they purport to represent.’ (Emphasis added.) “The governing principle is stated in Scott, Photographic Evidence (Second Edition), § 1027: “ ‘The amount of proof required varies with the purpose of the photograph. When a picture is offered as a general representation of a scene or object, very slight proof of reliability may be sufficient, but when it is offered as representing slight differences of height, breadth or length, much more convincing proof of dependability should be required.’ Further, ‘The sufficiency of the verification of a photograph is a preliminary question of fact to be decided by the trial judge, and his ruling will not be disturbed on appeal unless an abuse of discretion is shown.’ (Ibid.) See also, 32 C.J.S., Evidence, § 716; 29 Am. fur. 2d, Evidence, § 788.””

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