United States v. Bramble’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “only if from all the circumstances an inference of unfavorable testimony from an absent witness is a natural and reasonable one.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Serge Brato · United States v. Fred Moe Hagler, United States of America v. Steven Lamar Green

2. “[E.V.] is an alleged victim in Count III of the Indictment in the charges filed against the Defendant. The State had placed [E.V.] under subpoena for Defendant’s trial. [E.V.] did not appear at Defendant’s trial, pursuant to that subpoena, thus, is a missing witness. [E.V.] is not available to the Defendant, as he is a victim and the Defendant is precluded from contacting a victim by Arizona law[J If it is peculiarly within the power of either the prosecution or the defense to produce a witness who could give material testimony on an issue in the case, failure to call that witness may give rise to an inference that his testimony would be unfavorable to that party. However, no such conclusion should be drawn by you with regard to a witness who is equally available to both parties, or where the witness’s testimony would be merely cumulative. The jury will always bear in mind that the law never imposes on a defendant in a criminal case the burden or duty of calling any witness or producing any evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State of Arizona v. Heulon Colston Brown