State v. Kirk’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[a] trial court may exclude a person from appearing as a witness on behalf of a criminal defendant at trial if the court determines that the witness will not offer any testimony, but merely intends to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Adams, 07-Ca-0086 (9-29-2008) · State v. Salazar

2. “[w]here a defendant is not entitled to call a witness to the stand because of the witness's intention to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, the defendant is entitled to request an instruction that the jury should draw no inference from the absence of the witness because the witness was not available to either side. Such an instruction is intended to reduce the danger that the jury would, in fact, draw an inference from the absence of a witness who could corroborate defendant's testimony.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Adams, 07-Ca-0086 (9-29-2008) · 767 So. 2d 682 - State v. Haddad

3. “[p]ursuant to the Compulsory Process Clause of Section 10, Article I of the Ohio Constitution, a trial court may not exclude a person who has previously asserted his right against self-incrimination from appearing as a witness on behalf of a criminal defendant at trial.”

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