State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

36 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “a lawyer who assumes both of those roles in a single case makes it more difficult for opposing counsel to conduct effective cross-examination and creates an awkward scenario in which one advocate must challenge the credibility of his legal adversary”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Salmon · Nunn v. State

2. “Because no sanctions were imposed in this case, our task is to determine whether the State's discovery violation resulted in fundamental unfairness or substantively altered the outcome of the case. See State v. Rhodes , 591 S.W.2d 174 (Mo. App. 1979) ; State v. Couch , 569 S.W.2d 789 (Mo. App. 1978). If either inquiry brings forth an affirmative answer , then the trial court's failure to impose a sanction would constitute an abuse of discretion. State v. Royal , 610 S.W.2d 946 (Mo. banc 1981).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State of Missouri v. Danielle Ann Zuroweste

3. ““Our examination of the record reveals no fundamental unfairness or prejudice resulting from the State’s failure to fully comply with Rule 25.03. We also conclude that had the undisclosed evidence been made available to defendant before trial the outcome of the case would remain unchanged.””

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