State v. Coley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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. “general and unparticularized expert testimony concerning the reliability of eyewitness testimony, which is not specific to the witness whose testimony is in question, does not substantially assist the trier of fact”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. McKinney · Thomas v. State

2. “You are the sole judge of whether a witness should be believed. In making this decision, you may apply your own common sense and every day experiences. You should consider such factors as: (1) the witness’s behavior on the stand and manner of testifying; (2) did the witness appear to be telling the truth? (3) the witness’s opportunity to see or hear the things about which testimony was given; (4) the accuracy of the witness’s memory; (5) does the witness have a motive not to tell the truth? (6) does the witness have an interest in the outcome of the case? (7) was the witness's testimony consistent? (8) was the witness’s testimony supported or contradicted by evidence that you believe? and (9) whether and the extent to which the witness's testimony in the court differed from the statements made by the witness on any previous occasion. MPJI-Cr 3:30 addresses a witness’s identification of the defendant: You have heard evidence regarding the identification of the defendant as the person who committed the crime. In this connection, you should consider the witness's opportunity to observe the criminal act and the person committing it, including the length of time the witness had to observe the person committing the crime, the witness's state of mind and any other circumstance surrounding the event. You should also consider the witness’s certainty or lack of certainty, the accuracy of any prior description, and the witness's credibility or lack of credibility, as well as any other f”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bomas v. State

3. “First, the evidence must be relevant to a fact at issue in the case. Second, the expert must be qualified by specialized knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education in the field of expertise, and the testimony in question must substantially assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue. Finally, when the expert witness offers an opinion or states an inference, the underlying facts or data upon which the expert relied must be trustworthy.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Scott