State v. Newberry’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

71 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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “when the state's evidence is inherently incredible, self-destructive or opposed to known physical facts it will not be sufficient to permit a jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Washington v. State · Tlc v. Tlc

2. ““The trial courts have a wide discretion in determining the admissibility of photographs. State v. Stevens, 467 S.W.2d 10 (Mo.1971); State v. Crow, 486 S.W.2d 248 (Mo.1972); State v. Duisen, 428 S.W.2d 169 (Mo.1967). It has generally been held that even though a photograph may be inflammatory it is admissible if it tends to prove any material element of the State’s case; this includes the issues of identity, condition and location of the body, nature or location of wounds, and the cause of death; and, generally, if the photograph corroborates the oral testimony of the state or refutes defense testimony it is admissible. State v. Duisen, 428 S.W.2d 169 (Mo.1967); State v. McDaniel, 386 Mo. 656 , 80 S.W.2d 185 (1935); State v. Stevens, 467 S.W.2d 10 (Mo.1971); State v. Crow, 486 S.W.2d 248 (Mo.1972); State v. Clark, 494 S.W.2d 26 (Mo.1973). And a photo is not made inadmissible because the oral testimony may have described what is shown in the photo. Stevens, supra.” State v. Jackson, 499 S.W.2d 467, 472 [5-8] (Mo.1973).”

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

3. ““3. The following periods of delay shall be excluded in computing the time within which the arraignment or trial of any such offense must commence: (1) Any period of delay resulting from other criminal proceedings concerning the defendant, including but not limited to: (a) Delay resulting from an examination of the defendant and hearing on his mental competency or physical incapacity; (b) Delay resulting from trials with respect to other charges against the defendant; (c) Delay resulting from hearings on pretrial motions; (d) Delay resulting from a change of venue; and (e) Delay reasonably attributable to any period, not to exceed thirty days dur ing which any proceeding concerning the defendant is actually under advisement”.”

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