State v. Robertson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

54 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Where two or more persons are jointly indicted for the same criminal offense which is in its nature several, or are separately indicted for such offense or for separate offenses growing out of the same circumstances, and are tried separately, the fact that one defendant has pleaded guilty or has been convicted is, as a general rule, inadmissible as against the other, since competent and satisfactory evidence against one person charged with an offense is not necessarily so against another person charged with the same offense, and since each person charged with the commission of an offense must be tried upon evidence legally tending to show his guilt or innocence.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Clemmons v. State

2. “We have considered circumstances similar to the case at hand and have addressed this very question by answering that a promise to inform a prosecuting authority about a declarant’s cooperation is not an improper inducement producing involuntariness. . . . Under the circumstances the deputy’s statement or remark to Robertson that her cooperation in the investigation would be made known to a prosecutor did not in and of itself render Robertson’s statement involuntary.”

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