State v. Morey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 6 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Certainly Rule 801(d)(1)(A) of the Rhode Island Rules of Evidence has transformed prior inconsistent statement evidence into substantive evidence for a trial jury to consider. However, in this case, nothing said by the trial justice in his instructions to the trial jury violates that rule. Unlike the instruction given in State v. Pusyka, 592 A.2d 850 (R.I.1991), and relied upon by the defendant, in this case, the trial justice at no time instructed the trial jury that a previous inconsistent statement made by a trial witness was to be considered only ‘as affecting the credibility of that witness’ and that the prior inconsistent statement ‘is not evidence itself.’ Id. at 854 . “A fair reading of the instruction given to the trial jury in this case clearly reveals that at no point did the trial justice make or suggest any distinction between substantive and non-substantive evidence and, in fact, during his instructions to the trial jury, he referred to all of the evidence in the trial as being in the nature of substantive evidence.””

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

2. “an `almost universally recognized' exception to [Rhode Island] Rule 404(b) for the admission of evidence of uncharged sexual misconduct to show `lustful disposition or sexual propensity'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 803 So. 2d 916 - State v. Kennedy