State v. Yarbrough’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

51 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Defense counsel maintains Ms. Scott only acquiesced to a claim of lawful authority and her subsequently executed consent form cannot vindicate an earlier unwarranted search. Under its contention, in addition to proving the consent was given, the State has the burden of proving it was freely and voluntarily given. State v. Wolfe, La., 398 So.2d 1171 [1117] (1981). Only by analyzing the circumstances of an individual consent can one ascertain whether it was voluntary or coerced. In the instant case, the issue of consent turns on the credibility of the two witnesses giving contradictory testimony as well as the circumstances surrounding the consent. Officer Keating testified that Ms. Scott consented at the outset and cooperated fully. Ms. Scott, however, testified that she did not consent to a search throughout the apartment. Because consent is a question of fact involving the credibility of witnesses, the determination of the trial judge, who had an opportunity to observe and hear the witnesses, is given great weight on review. State v. Robinson, 386 So.2d 1374 (La. 1980); State v. Dunbar, 356 So.2d 956 (La.1978); State v. Schouest, 351 So.2d 462 (La.1977); State v. Temple, 343 So.2d 1024 (La.1977)." 418 So.2d at 506 . The trial judge observed the witnesses. Nothing contradicted their testimony. He did not err in his ruling on the motion to suppress, and assignment of error number 1 is without merit.”

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

2. “all recent Louisiana felony cases, the record must affirmatively show that the defendant was adequately advised of the three rights prescribed by Boykin . " But, "[i]n the case of pleas entered more than six years ago, the record must show only that the defendant voluntarily pleaded guilty with a full understanding of `the connotation and consequences.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 621 So. 2d 769 - State v. Shelton

3. “`BY THE COURT: You also give up your right to remain silent, your right against self-incrimination. You are waiving that because you are incriminating yourself when you plead guilty. Do you understand that? `BY DEFENDANT YARBROUGH: `Yes, sir.'”

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