State v. Austin’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Three disinterested eyewitnesses were unable to identify Wesley (Austin) as the man involved. There were no corroborating witnesses, no confessions, no admissions, no weapon, no fingerprints, no suspicious loot, no license numbers traced. The identification by Detective Schultz was the sole evidence of guilt. It is a ‘one versus one situation’. Defendant’s demeanor showed no guilt, in fact the contrary. When the detectives came to the house looking for Leslie (Austin), they were not even aware of Wesley. Wesley overheard their conversation and voluntarily came outside to the parked car the detectives were checking. The detectives then took him to be viewed by Schultz, but Schultz was not up to it, so they released Wesley without charge. Then next morning they went back to Wesley’s mother’s house and Wesley was still there. These are not the actions of a guilty man, particularly one who has shot a policeman.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Austin v. Swenson