State v. Esparza’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Any amount of corroboration is sufficient to give the case to the jury to determine the sufficiency of the corroboration .... All that is required is that the evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, corroborates the testimony of the accomplice as to some material fact or facts, and tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime. It is not necessary that the corroborating evidence be sufficient, in itself, to warrant a conviction or establish a pri-ma facie case. It is the combined and cumulative weight of the evidence, other than the testimony of the accomplice witness, which satisfies the statute. The State need not point to a single, isolated fact which is sufficient corroboration.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Weight · State v. Fraser

2. “A conviction cannot be had upon the testimony of an accomplice unless the accomplice is corroborated by such other evidence as tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense, and the corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the offense, or the circumstances thereof.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Weight · State v. Fraser