Commonwealth v. Zeininger’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

39 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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ex parte in-court testimony or its functional equivalent — that is, material such as affidavits, custodial examinations, prior testimony that the defendant was unable to cross-examine, or similar pretrial statements that declarants would reasonably expect to be used prosecutorially,” “extrajudicial statements contained in formalized testimonial materials, such as affidavits, depositions, prior testimony, or confessions;” [and] “statements that were made under circumstances which would lead an objective witness reasonably to believe that the statement would be available for use at a later trial.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State of New Hampshire v. Bryan Maga

2. “"Rather, OAT prepares the certification records in concert with its statutory charge to administer an internal regulatory program that standardizes 'satisfactory methods, techniques and criteria for the conduct of [breathalyzer] tests.' G. L. c. 90, § 24K. In this sense the records are 'typical of entries made systematically or as a matter of routine to ... provide internal controls ,' which are admissible under the Federal rules and the common law."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 93 Mass. App. Ct. 308 - Commonwealth v. McEvoy

3. “Contrary to the dissent's suggestion|[,] ... we do not hold, and it is not the case, that anyone whose testimony may be relevant in establishing the chain of custody, authenticity of the sample, or accuracy of the testing device, must appear in person as part of the prosecution's case.... [DJocu-ments prepared in the regular course of equipment maintenance may well qualify as nontestimomial records. See infra, at 2550-2551, 2552.”

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