4 Neb. Ct. App. 465 - State v. Lomack’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
2
states following
March 2005
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Illinois v. Gates · United States v. Mendenhall · Schmerber v. State of California · Roviaro v. United States · Winston v. Lee
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If it appears from the evidence in the case or from other showing by a party that an informer may be able to give testimony necessary to a fair determination of the issue of guilt or innocence in a criminal case . . . and the government invokes the privilege, the judge shall give the government an opportunity to show in camera facts relevant to determining whether the informer can, in fact, supply that testimony. The showing may be in the form of affidavits or testimony, as the judge directs. If the judge finds that there is a reasonable probability that the informer can give the testimony, and the government elects not to disclose his identity, the judge on motion of the defendant in a criminal case shall dismiss the charges to which the testimony would relate, and the judge may do so on his own motion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“To establish reversible error from a court’s refusal to give a requested instruction, an appellant has the burden to show that (1) the tendered instruction is a correct statement of the law, (2) the tendered instruction is warranted by the evidence, and (3) the appellant was prejudiced by the court’s refusal to give the tendered instruction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“there [was] nothing to show that the officers could have determined, when making their split-second decision, how effectively the substance was packaged or whether [the defendant] could have bitten through the packaging”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Alverez
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.