State v. Rowell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

106 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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “* * * after injecting it [an inadmissible statement] into the case to influence the jury, the prosecutor ought not to be heard to say, after he has-secured a conviction, it was harmless. As the appellate, court, has not the insight into the deliberations .ofthe jury room, the presumption is to be indulged, in favor of the liberty, of the citizen, that whatever the prosecutor, against the protest of the defendant has laid before the jury, helped to make up the weight of the prosecution which resulted in the verdict of guilty.’ ””

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jones · State v. Gutierrez

2. “[T]he established New Mexico procedure, with certain exceptions not here applicable, is that proof of separate criminal offenses is not admissible and it is prejudicial error to admit such proof.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Paul · Casaus v. State

3. “We are convinced that the damage implicit in the asking of the question was in no way repaired by virtue of the fact that the objection was sustained. Neither was it overcome by the admonitions given the jury. We would be deluding ourselves if we were to believe that human nature being what it is, at least some of the jurors would not assume because of the form of the question, that indeed appellant had been * * * [arrested] as stated by the district attorney. Whether or not * * * [he] had was irrelevant in this case and, accordingly a reversal and new trial are inevitable.”

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