State v. Pattioay’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 38 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “recognize[s] that the courts of this State have the inherent supervisory power over criminal prosecutions to ensure that evidence illegally obtained by government officials or their agents is not utilized in the administration of criminal justice through the courts.”

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. In re J.O. · State v. Augafa

2. “Appellate review of factual determinations made by the trial court deciding pretrial motions in a criminal case is governed by the clearly erroneous standard. A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when (1) the record lacks substantial evidence to support the finding, or (2) despite substantial evidence in support of the finding, the appellate court is nonetheless left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Anderson · Hirono v. Peabody

3. “in a case such as the one at bar, the proponent of a motion to suppress has the burden of establishing not only that the evidence sought to be excluded was unlawfully secured, but also, that his [or her] own Fourth Amendment rights were violated by the search and seizure sought to be challenged.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. State v. Wilson · State v. Anderson