Russell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Under Franks , a search warrant may be challenged if (a) the defendant makes a substantial preliminary showing that the affiant made a false statement knowingly and intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth, and (b) the allegedly false statement was necessary to the finding of probable cause.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bryan Morton v. State of Mississippi

2. “(1) the new evidence was discovered after the trial; (2) it could- not by due diligence have been discovered prior to trial; (3) it is material to the issue and not merely- cumulative or impeaching; and (4) [it] will probably produce a different result or verdict in the new-trial.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 221 So. 3d 1041 - John Ray Kidd v. State of Mississippi

3. “The legal standard for challenging a search[-]warrant affidavit is found in Franks v. Delaware , 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 , 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bryan Morton v. State of Mississippi