State v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 41 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The trial court has considerable discretion in allowing or rejecting argument of counsel, and its rulings are reversible only for abuse of discretion where the argument is plainly unwarranted. It is settled by numerous cases that the prosecuting attorney may comment on the failure of the defendant to call available witnesses who might reasonably be expected to give testimony in his favor. Such comments are permissible because a logical inference can be drawn from a failure to call these witnesses to testify that their testimony would be damaging rather than favorable, (citations omitted).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Griffith · State v. Fair

2. ““We had a party.” “It was a big party.” But where are the guests? Who came in here and verified the party? MR. ROGERS: (Defense Counsel) Object to that, Your Honor. The defendant stated the names of those people. They’re equally available to the State. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. STIGALL: (Prosecutor) He says these people are available to the State. These are the defendant’s friends. MR. ROGERS: (Defense Counsel) I’ll object to that, Your Honor. The evidence is that Billy Kidd is related to the alleged victim. THE COURT: This is argument; overruled. MR. STIGALL: (Prosecutor) These are his friends. He lives with them, plays with them, has parties with them. Nobody came in here to verify that party, except this defendant. Why didn’t they bring in somebody to tell us about this party, and what happened? Why didn’t they bring in Billy, the kid? MR. ROGERS: (Defense Counsel) I object to that, Your Honor. That witness is peculiarly available to the State, being a relative, by marriage, of the alleged victim. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. STIGALL: (Prosecutor) These are his friends. Why didn’t he bring in anybody— MR. ROGERS: (Defense Counsel) May we approach the bench? MR. STIGALL: (Prosecutor) —to verify this party. MR. ROGERS: (Defense Counsel) May we approach the bench? (Counsel approached the bench and the following proceedings were out of the hearing of the jury:) MR. ROGERS: (Defense Counsel) I object, Your Honor, and move that the jury be instructed to disregard that last comment ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Moore v. Wyrick

3. “[[Image here]] PROSECUTOR: ... He’s been in jail since June 28th doing nothing but thinking about this case. And I'll tell you, that’s over half a year to think of every friend you possibly had and a half a year to get her [Defense counsel] investigator to go out and find where he was. DEFENSE COUNSEL: I’m going to object, your Honor. I’m not going to bring perjured witnesses in here. PROSECUTOR: That’s right. She can’t bring in people that will lie for him. DEFENSE COUNSEL: I object to that, your Honor. That is irrelevant. THE COURT: Overruled. PROSECUTOR: She said it. The only people that could come in here would be liars to say that they were with him. [[Image here]]”

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