Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 692 NW2D 452 - Pederson v. State

Pederson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Giglio v. United States · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois · Grupo Mexicano Desarrollos v. Alliance Bond Fund Inc

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

  1. “They interviewed me so much and through the whole thing what came out of whose mouth wasn’t that clear to me to this day. I’m not saying I was lying, but through all of what came out of whose mouth I had to try to remember got twisted I think from my statement. I had to stick to certain things and remember it so I thought it was the truth.... Things would go on paper and I was asked to remember key things[.] It really was just too much it really confuted] me.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “This “extra-Summary” testimony demonstrates that Moses’ recollection of the events surrounding the murder went beyond the conversations represented in the Summary, and Moses’ recollection of many details — the pattern on the soles of appellant’s shoes, his description of the bag and the bloody clothes it contained, and his statements regarding the size of appellant’s shoes — were all corroborated by Dean’s testimony and incriminated appellant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “(1) the evidence must be favorable to the defendant because it would have been either exculpatory or impeaching; (2) the evidence must have been suppressed by the prosecution, intentionally or otherwise; and (3) the evidence must be material—in other words, the absence of the evidence must have caused prejudice to the defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.