Odekirk v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of the defendant. A defendant should be considered absent whenever his whereabouts are unknown and in addition he is attempting to avoid apprehension or prosecution or his whereabouts cannot be determined by due diligence. A defendant should be considered unavailable whenever his whereabouts are known but his presence for trial cannot be obtained or he resists being returned to the state for trial.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Conway v. State · State v. Gonzales

2. “In reviewing trial court fact findings we apply the “clearly erroneous” standard. Johnson v. State, 631 P.2d 508, 512 (Alaska App.1981). “A finding of fact is ‘clearly erroneous’ when, although there may be evidence to support it, the reviewing court is left with the definite and firm conviction on the entire record that a mistake has been made.” Troyer v. State, 614 P.2d 313 , 318 n. 11 (Alaska 1980) (citations omitted).”

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

3. “a failure to exhaust every conceivable method of locating a defendant will not establish a lack of due diligence so long as the state, employing customary methods, continues to actively seek a defendant.”

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