State v. Briggs’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “carved out a measure of discretion for the person overseeing the bailing process. This was consistent with the historical approach to sureties.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Ex Parte Singleton · Saunders v. Hornecker

2. “"The gradual emergence of the sufficient sureties clause and the very limited record of its eventual inclusion in our constitution requires us to draw our conclusions on its meaning and application from the historical development of the bail system and other contextual indicators of its meaning. Ultimately, we believe the core purpose of the clause was to guarantee a bailable individual access to a surety of some form. However, a number of factors leads us to conclude that the framers did not intend that such access be unfettered or tied specifically to a commercial bonding process. "The strongest support for our conclusions rests on the language of the clause itself in historical perspective. We believe the framers were at least familiar with the history of the bailing process and the role of surety in that process. Moreover, we know that the framers were familiar with the provisions of other constitutive documents and regularly referenced them in the course of debating drafts of our constitution. . . . These factors indicate that the framers were conscious of the historical lineage of the words they chose and meant what they said: `[a]ll persons shall . . . be bailable, by sufficient sureties ,' subject to some exceptions. Iowa Const. art. I, § 12 (emphasis added). We believe this was a clear creation of a right to access a surety of some form. However, this language does not indicate that the framers intended that a person should be bailable by any surety without limit. "T”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Ex Parte Singleton

3. “We are also confident that the framers did not intend to favor one particular method of surety ... by inclusion of the sufficient sureties clause.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Saunders v. Hornecker