AMARO v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““This result does not imply, however, that the Trial Court has no control over the exercise of the privilege granted the defendant. It is significant that the legislature did not state that the defendant shall be permitted the taking of depositions of any witness, but rather stated that he may, by leave of court or by notice to the prosecuting attorney, take the deposition of witnesses residing within or without the state. We believe that this distinction in the language provides, consistent with the traditions of the common law in this area, for a selective and discriminating control by the Trial Court....””

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

2. ““The issue raised by the appellants is this: Does Burns’ § 9-1610, supra, [Ind. Ann. Stat. (1956)] grant to criminal defendants the right to take depositions of potential witnesses without a showing that the witness will not be able to testify on trial, to be denied by the Trial Court only where a paramount interest of the State is shown? We think that within the confines of a limited discretion of the Trial Court to prevent ‘fishing expeditions’ or other abuses, the answer is yes.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 155 Ind. App. 226 - Reynolds v. State

3. “"A defendant, by leave of court or by written notice to the prosecuting attorney, may take the depositions of witnesses residing within or without the state, to be read on the trial; ..."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 170 Ind. App. 615 - Gutowski v. State