United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 federal appellate · 1 district · 16 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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Because it is premised on the Confrontation Clause, the Bruton rule, like the Confrontation Clause itself, does not apply to nontestimonial statements.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Luckie · State v. Raymond L. Nieves

2. “(1) the declarant must be unavailable; (Given Saba’s refusal to testify after being given formal immunity, the parties do not dispute that this requirement is met, see Rule 804(a)(2).) (2) the statement must, from the perspective of the average, reasonable person, truly be adverse to the declarant’s penal interest; and (3) corroborating circumstances must truly establish the trustworthiness of the statement.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Ouedraogo

3. “[t]he court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 287 F. Supp. 3d 1187 - United States v. Deleon