Lambert v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3600 (Innocence Protection Act of 2004)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Kyles v. Whitley · District Attorney's Office for the Third Judicial District v. Osborne · Risher v. State · State v. Jones
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.
“favorable to the petitionee for the petitioner to then move for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, NRS 176.09187, and is consistent with other jurisdictions interpretations of analogous statutes, see, e.g., Lambert v. State, 435 P.3d 1011, 1019 (Alaska Ct. App. 2018) ("Importantly, the defendant need not show any likelihood that the DNA results will actually be favorable to his claim of innocence. Instead, he need only show that, assuming the results are as favorable as the defendant has shown they could be, these favorable results would raise a reasonable probability that the outcome of the defendanes trial would be different.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.