Cason v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The general rule is that in order to overturn a conviction on suppression-of-evidence grounds, the evidence suppressed must have been material or probative. . 34 A.L.R.3d 16 , at 38. While suppression of some impeaching evidence can be grounds for a new trial, if merely impeaching, cumulative or corroborating it will not ordinarily invalidate a verdict. To do that, the evidence must be of a character to raise a substantial likelihood that it would have affected the result if known at the trial. Ingram v. Peyton, (C.A. 4, 1966), 367 F.2d 933 . The case of United States v. Keogh, (C.A. 2,1968), 391 F.2d 138 , 34 A.L.R.3d 1 , holds that relief might be given where the suppression was not deliberate and no request made and where hindsight disclosed that the defense could have put the evidence to not insignificant use, but in such a case the ‘standard of materiality must be considerably higher’.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Roach v. Moore