Burkhalter v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 42 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The jury should have been given the opportunity to judge [the witness’s] credibility for themselves. The trial court’s refusal to prevent disclosure of the state’s plan ... deprived the jury of that function. Further, we find that such a deprivation amounted to a denial of due process. It is axiomatic that a state may not knowingly use false evidence, including false testimony, to obtain a tainted conviction. This rule does not cease to apply merely because the false testimony goes only to the credibility of the witness. ... The jury’s estimate of the truthfulness and reliability of a given witness may well be determinative of guilt or innocence. ... Even if we assume this ignorance [that the witness did not know of the state’s promise], arguendo, we find that the prosecutor’s silence as to the plan ... conveyed an impression to the jury which the State knew to be false and one which should have been corrected.”

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

2. “The point is that the jury should have been given the opportunity to judge [the state’s critical witness’s] credibility for themselves_ (Emphasis in original.) ****** As recognized in Napue, the jury’s estimate of the truthfulness and reliability of a given witness may well be determinative of guilt or innocence. (Emphasis added.) ****** As previously stated, [because the witness was critical to establish an element of the state’s case] it is of no consequence that the falsehood bore upon the witness’ credibility rather than directly upon appellant’s guilt. (Emphasis added.) ****** Due process, perhaps the most fundamental concept in our law, embodies principles of fairness rather than an immutable line drawing as to every aspect of a criminal trial....”

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

3. “We fully appreciate the State’s position that there was no false evidence here, since Whitehurst did not know that he would not be prosecuted. Even if we assume this ignorance, we find that the prosecutor’s silence as to the plan not to prosecute conveyed an impression to the jury which the State knew to be false and one which should have been corrected.”

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