State v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 16 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[I]t is difficult to see why the disclosure of accurate information about a particular penalty that may be imposed — if it is permissible for the state to impose that penalty — could be unconstitutionally coercive. Rather, advising a defendant of the lawful consequences that may flow from his or her decision to engage in a certain behavior ensures that that defendant makes an informed choice whether to engage in that behavior or not. Indeed, the failure to disclose accurate information regarding the potential legal consequences of certain behavior would seem to be a more logical basis for a defendant to assert that his or her decision to engage in that behavior was coerced and involuntary.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State of Arizona v. Francisco L. Encinas Valenzuela · McCoy v. North Dakota Department of Transportation

2. ““ ‘ “Concededly such a threat may be coercive in the sense that an accused would not have consented to the search in the absence of tire threat. But not all coercion inducing consent to a search is constitutionalhj impermissible. If the officers threaten only to do what the law permits them to do, the coercion that the, threat may produce is not constitutionally objectionable.” [Citation omitted.]”’ State v. Moore, 354 Or. 493, 502 , 318 P.3d 1133 (2013), opinion adhered to as modified on reconsideration, 354 Or. 835 , 322 P.3d 486 (2014).”

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

3. “evidence of a refusal *** may be offered against [him].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Swan