236 Or. App. 99 - State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “This case proceeded to trial in April, and the state filed another amended information on the date of trial. The third amended information differed from the second amended information only in that the date alleged for Count 1 had been changed to match the dates alleged for Counts 2 and 3. Defendant was convicted by a jury on Counts 2 and 3. The charges relating to the controlled substances were dismissed at trial on the state's motion. The issue in this case is whether the delay in prosecuting the case to trial was unreasonable under ORS 135.747 and ORS 135.750. [1] ORS 135.747 provides:”

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

2. “The defendant of course has a choice to make when there is a motion to consolidate, that choice comes with benefits and detriments. The benefit will be that the jury won't hear about two cases; the jury will just hear about one case. The detriment is that necessarily there will be a delay while the Court finds room in the Court's calendar for a second jury trial. And it's the defendant's choice. I submit the defendant reasonably could expect that there would be a delay in the court finding a second jury trial date for her, it's going to be a delay of a matter of a few months.”

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

3. “"However, I would ask the Court to, when looking at statutory speedy trial to consider this decision that the defendant made to [challenge] the motion for consolidation. Isn't that the key issue as to why the delay has lasted as long as it has? It was the speedy trial—the key to the speedy trial courtroom door was open to the defendant, she could have had a trial a month ago or so and chose instead, which of course is her privilege to say, `No I don't want to have a trial a month ago with my felony case, instead I want to have a separate trial sometime later.'"”

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