State v. Browder’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 57 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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “An appeal may be taken to this court from a final judgment entered by the superior court or a judge thereof in any action or proceeding, civil or criminal, except that the state shall have a right to appeal in criminal cases only to test the sufficiency of the indictment or on the ground that the sentence is too lenient.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Kott v. State · Alexander v. City of Anchorage

2. ““[a]n appeal to the supreme court is a matter of right, except that the state shall have no right of appeal in criminal cases, except to test the sufficiency of the indictment . .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Kott v. State · State v. Gibson

3. ““(a) The supreme court has final appellate jurisdiction in all actions and. proceedings. The supreme court may issue injunctions, writs of review, mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, habeas corpus, and all other writs necessary or proper to the complete exercise of its jurisdiction. Each justice may issue a writ of habeas corpus, upon petition by or on behalf of any person held in actual custody and may make the writ returnable before the justice himself or before the supreme court, or before any judge of the superior court of the state. An appeal to the supreme court is a matter of right, ex cept that the state shall have no right of appeal in criminal cases, except to test the sufficiency of the indictment or information and under (b) of this section. (b) The supreme court has jurisdiction to hear appeals of sentences of imprisonment lawfully imposed by the superior courts on the grounds that the sentence is excessive or too lenient and, in the exercise of this • jurisdiction, may modify the sentence as pro- ' vided by law and by the constitution of this state. For the purpose of considering ap-peaHs of sentences on these grounds, the supreme court may sit in divisions.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Breese Ex Rel. Breese v. Smith · State v. Marathon Oil Company