310 N.J. Super. 407 - State v. Purnell’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Teague v. Lane · Johnson v. United States
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[0]n December 14, 1988, Braynard Purnell testified before the Camden County Grand Jury that on the night of August 26, 1988[,] he had returned to his house after chasing someone behind his house and entered through the front door; whereas, in fact he had waited, after killing Lawrence Talley, for the police who had been summoned to the area by [defendant’s daughter], to leave the scene; he then proceeded to tap on the kitchen window and instruct [his daughter] to permit him to climb back into the house through the bedroom window.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Purnell
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.