Jackson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 27 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(a) In a criminal prosecution, the voluntary out-of-court prior statement of a witness who is present and subject to cross-examination may be used as affirmative evidence with substantive independent testimonial value. (b) The rule in subsection (a) of this section shall apply regardless of whether the witness' in-court testimony is consistent with the prior statement or not. The rule shall likewise apply with or without a showing of surprise by the introducing party.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Smith v. State · Burrell v. State

2. “In applying for the warrant, the police were not required to peer into the future and accurately forecast the night's developments. They were entitled to rely upon reasonable expectations. Similarly, the facts known to the magistrate when he signed the warrant, not those which developed at some later time, are the relevant facts in assessing the need for a nighttime search.”); Dixon v. State, Del.Supr., 567 A.2d 854, 856 (1989) (”

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

3. “There was no way of identifying the responsible party or parties at that time, except for the fact that each individual was an occupant of the vehicle in which the contraband was found in a non-secretive location.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 192 Wis. 2d 470 - State v. Riddle