Broadus v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

34 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “If you should fail to reach a decision, this case will be left open and undecided. Like all cases it must be disposed of at some time. Another trial would be a heavy burden on both sides. There is no reason to believe that the case can be tried again any better or more exhaustively than it has been. There is no reason to believe that more evidence or clearer evidence would be produced on behalf of either side.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Elswick v. State · Parish v. State

2. ““Although Terry involved the stop and subsequent patdown search for weapons of a person suspected of criminal activity, it did not restrict the preventive search to the person of the detained suspect. Protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger. Roadside encounters between police and suspects are especially hazardous, and danger may arise from the possible presence of weapons in the area surrounding a suspect. Thus, the search of the passenger compartment of an automobile, limited to those areas in which a weapon may be placed or hidden, is permissible if the police officer possesses a reasonable belief based on specific and articulable facts which, taken together with the ra tional inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant the officer to believe that the suspect is dangerous and the suspect may gain immediate control of weapons.””

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

3. ““The decision to grant a motion for severance is within the trial court’s discretion. Brewer v. State (1983), Ind., 449 N.E.2d 1091 . The defendant’s burden is to show a fair trial could not otherwise be had, not merely that severance would enhance the prospects for acquittal.... Further, to determine whether actual prejudice resulted from nonseverance, we look at what actually happened at trial. [Citations omitted.]””

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