State v. Dodson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Ordinarily, discrepancies and inconsistencies in the testimony of a witness are matters for the determination of the jury. Miller v. Mutiplex Faucet Co., Mo., 315 S.W.2d 224 ; Pettis v. St. Louis Public Service Co., Mo., 240 S.W.2d 909 ; Ryan v. United States, CA 8, 99 F.2d 864 ; State v. Washington, Mo., 383 S. W.2d 518 ; State v. Spraggins, Mo., 368 S.W.2d 407 . It has been held several times that where the testimony of a single witness on an issue is contradictory, with no explanation and no circumstance tending to show which version is correct, no case is made; that, however, if the conflict is reasonably explained, or if explanatory circumstances are present, then the credibility and weight of the testimony are for the jury. Sparks v. Auslander, 353 Mo. 177 , 182 S.W.2d 167 ; Goslin v. Kurn, 351 Mo. 395 , 173 S.W.2d 79 ; Adelsberger v. Sheehy, 332 Mo. 954 , 59 S.W.2d 644 .” (Emphasis added.)”

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