Jaske v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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. “When in connection with any civil or special statutory proceeding it is required that any pleading, motion, petition, supporting affidavit, or other document of any kind, be verified, or that an oath be taken, it shall be sufficient if the subscriber simply affirms the truth of the matter to be verified by an affirmation or representation in substantially the following language: "I (we) affirm, under the penalties for perjury, that the foregoing representation(s) is (are) true.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. In Re Paternity of HRM · Gaddie v. Manlief

2. ““1. That the Defendant herein is presently charged in the above entitled cause with the offense of conspiracy to commit escape, a Class C felony; 2. That the said charges were filed by the Madison County Prosecutor’s office by the Madison County Prosecutor, William F. Lawler, Jr.; 3. That Chief Deputy Prosecutor, Thomas J. Broderick, Jr., is the Deputy Prosecuting Attorney assigned to prosecute this case; 5. That, prior to being elected as Prosecuting Attorney for the present term, William F. Lawler, Jr., represented the Defendant in a Petition for Post Conviction Relief with regard to his conviction for first degree murder arising out of the Superior Court of St. Joseph County, State of Indiana. That upon his election and taking office in January, 1983, the said William F. Lawler, Jr., did resign as Defendant’s attorney and turned the case over to other counsel for continued representation on the Petition for Post Conviction Relief; 6. That, the said William F. Lawler, Jr., did, during the course of his representation of Defendant obtain knowledge of facts which are closely interwoven with the facts upon which the present prosecution is based; 7. That, pursuant to I.C. 33-14-1-6, the Defendant requests the appointment of a Special Prosecutor for the reason that this Prosecutor and, therefore, all persons on his staff and/or associated with him in the private practice of law have a conflict of interest due to the elected Prosecutor’s representation of this Defendant at some t”

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

3. “Jaske's employment of the words `sworn upon . . . oath,' followed by `says' to preface his subsequent statements, is an assertion of the truth of his statements under penalties of perjury.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Paternity of HRM