State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A conviction cannot be had upon the testimony of an accomplice unless he [sic ] is corroborated by such other evidence as tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense, and the corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the offense, or the circumstances thereof.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Haugen · State v. Hogie

2. ““STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT “3. The defendant did not act under strong prqvocation. “4. There were no substantial grounds which tended to excuse or justify the defendant’s conduct. “5. The victim of the defendant’s conduct did not induce or facilitate its commission. “6. The defendant has not made or will not likely make restitution or reparation to the victim of his conduct for damage or injury sustained. “7. The defendant has a history of prior delinquency or criminal activity, or has not led a law-abiding life for a substantial period of time before the commission of the present offense. “8. The defendant’s conduct was the result of circumstances likely to recur. “9. The character, history, and attitudes of the defendant indicate that he is likely to commit another crime. “10. The defendant is particularly unlikely to respond affirmatively to probationary treatment. “11. The imprisonment of the defendant would not entail undue hardship to himself or his dependents. “12. The defendant is neither elderly nor in poor health. “14. The defendant did not cooperate with law enforcement authorities by bringing other offenders to justice, or otherwise cooperate. “15. Confinement is necessary in order to protect the public from further criminal activity by the defendant. “16. The defendant is in need of correctional treatment which can most effectively be provided if he is placed in total confinement. “17. It would unduly depreciate the seriousness of the offe”

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

3. ““ ‘But the corroboration of accomplices need not include the corroboration of every material fact testified to by the accomplices. These accomplices are witnesses themselves, and their credibility is for the jury. Thus it is not necessary that the corroborative testimony be in itself strong enough to support a conviction. The corroboration must be such as to have a tendency to connect the defendant with receiving stolen property knowing it to be stolen when he received it. If there is such corroborative testimony, then the jury may from that infer that the accomplices spoke the truth as to other matters — they being the judge of the credibility of the witnesses.... The purpose of corroborative testimony is to show that the accomplices are reliable witnesses and worthy of credit; but must be on that phase of their testimony which tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime.’ ” State v. Smith, 238 N.W.2d 662, 670 (N.D.1976) (quoting State v. Marcovitz, 63 N.D. 458, 462-463 , 248 N.W. 481, 484 (1933)) [Citations omitted].”

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