Castell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 137 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 144 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The hearsay rule does not prevent a witness from testifying to what he has heard; it is rather a restriction on the proof of fact through extrajudicial statements. From the viewpoint of the Confrontation Clause, a witness under oath, subject to cross-examination, and whose demeanor can be observed by the trier of fact, is a reliable informant not only to what he has seen but also to what he has heard.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gerisch v. Meadows

2. “Use of phrases such as 'I think so' or 'I don’t think so' do not, when considered in the context of the entire voir dire of the juror, necessarily indicate an equivocation with regard to an unwillingness to impose a death penalty.”); see also Williams v. Collins, 16 F.3d 626, 632-33 (5th Cir.1994) (holding that counsel’s decision not to rehabilitate venire members who stated that they did not”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 490 F. Supp. 2d 1261 - Jefferson v. Terry

3. “We hold that the terms `agent' and `employee,' as used in OCGA § 17-10-30 (b)(6) (Code Ann. § 27-2534.1) ... should be given their common, everyday meanings: An employee is one who is hired by another and an agent is one who acts for another.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Whittington v. State