State v. Corkill’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “does not depend solely on whether-as an abstract matter-the lawyer's questions or the elicited answers would have been inadmissible if ... objected to. Rather, any 'plain error' must relate to the trial court having not taken affirmative steps to intervene in the parties' litigation.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 289 Or. App. 391 - State v. Cone · State v. Kevin Drown

2. “[B]ecause the defendant never objected to the challenged testimony, and the trial court never ruled it admissible, we agree with the defendant that '[t]he pertinent question is whether the trial court erred in failing sua sponte to strike' that testimony.”

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

3. “claimed 'plain error' is associated with a trial court not having sua sponte interrupted a line of questioning (or not having excluded the resulting evidence sua sponte ),”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 289 Or. App. 391 - State v. Cone