State v. Hallum’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 21 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The broad scope of conduct that may give rise to a forfeiture is consistent with the philosophy underlying the forfeiture rule: . . . ‘[T]he disclosure of relevant information at a public trial is a paramount interest, and any significant interference with that interest, other than by exercising a legal right to object at the trial itself, is a wrongful act.’ . . . Thus, it is the fact that a defendant’s conduct interferes with the interest in having witnesses testify at a public trial that makes the defendant’s conduct wrongful.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Maestas · Commonwealth v. Edwards

2. “Nor should the law permit an accused to subvert a criminal prosecution by causing witnesses not to testify at trial who have, at the pretrial stage, disclosed information which is inculpatory as to the accused.”

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

3. “As the cases in this area demonstrate, the specific method used by a defendant to keep a witness from testifying is not determinative.”

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