Masaka v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(2) The following are not excluded under s. 90.802, provided that the declar-ant is unavailable as a witness: 4 [[Image here]] (c) Statement against interest. — A statement which, at the time of its making, was so far contrary to the declar-ant’s pecuniary or proprietary interest or tended to subject the declarant to liability or to render invalid a claim by the declarant against another, so that a person in the declarant’s position would not have made the statement unless he or she believed it to be true. A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused is inadmissible, unless corroborating circumstances show the trustworthiness of the statement.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Baez v. State · 68 So. 3d 936 - Merritt v. State

2. “[G]iving the principals instruction is error when there is no evidence that the defendant had a conscious intent that the crime be committed and did some act or said some word which was intended to and in fact did incite a third party to commit the crime with which the defendant is charged.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. McGriff v. State · Hanks v. State

3. “should consider 'the language used and the setting in which the statement was made,' and decide whether the statement is 'consistent with both the defendant's general version of events and the other evidence presented at trial.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 239 So. 3d 129 - Payton v. State