Winfrey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 20 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It is the obligation and responsibility of appellate courts 'to ensure that the evidence presented actually supports a conclusion that the defendant committed the crime that was charged.'”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Winfrey v. State · Ross v. State

2. “[W]e conclude that scent-discrimination lineups, when used alone or as primary evidence, are legally insufficient to support a conviction. Like the Supreme Court of Washington, we believe that "[t]he dangers inherent in the use of dog tracking evidence can only be alleviated by the presence of corroborating evidence." To the extent that lower-court opinions suggest otherwise, we overrule them and expressly hold that when inculpatory evidence is obtained from a dog-scent lineup, its role in the court room is merely supportive.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Winfrey, Megan AKA Megan Winfrey Hammond · Winfrey v. State

3. “[t]he dangers inherent in the use of dog tracking evidence can only be alleviated by the presence of corroborating evidence.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Winfrey, Megan AKA Megan Winfrey Hammond · Winfrey v. State