530 So. 2d 404 - Gardner v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Application of the exclusionary rule to enforce a defendant’s constitutional due process rights has resulted in a rule of law which denies the admissibility, by the State against the accused, of evidence of a photographic lineup or other identification procedure conducted by the State which the court finds is so ‘unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to irreparable mistaken identification’ as to be unreliable.... ... The State does not have constitutional due process rights to which the exclusionary rule applies. Furthermore, a defendant’s constitutional right to confront his accusers includes the right to a full and fair cross-examination of an adverse witness in a criminal trial.... In addition, the right to present evidence on one’s own behalf is a fundamental right basic to our adversary system of criminal justice, and is part of the “due process of law” that is guaranteed to defendants in state criminal courts by the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal constitution.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Kimble v. State

2. “to present evidence in his own behalf and to cross-examine his accuser.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 913 So. 2d 696 - McBride v. State