State v. Lain’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The witness Lawrence Paul Kocher has given evidence showing his connection with the commission of the alleged offense for which defendants King and Armento are on trial, and, therefore, under his testimony he is an accomplice. “The term ‘accomplice’ refers to and includes all persons who participate in the crime with which the defendants are charged; that is, all persons who knowingly and voluntarily cooperate or aid and abet in its commission. “Under the law of this State, a defendant cannot be convicted of a public offense upon the evidence of an accomplice unless his testimony is corroborated by other evidence which shall tend to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense charged, and the corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the offense or circumstances thereof. The corroboration may be by either direct or circumstantial evidence. “A defendant cannot be convicted of the offense or offenses charged against him upon the testimony of such accomplice alone unless there is other evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense charged, and such other evidence, if any, is not sufficient if it merely shows that the offense was committed or the circumstances thereof, but it must be such as tends to point and single out the defendant as one of the persons who committed it.””

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