809 So. 2d 1112 - State v. Bright’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]he cumulative effect of the missing portions of testimony of the defendant and other material witnesses, and the frequency of `inaudible' and `spelled phonetically' in the transcript”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 913 So. 2d 843 - State v. Scott · 829 So. 2d 650 - State v. Simpson

2. “Without a complete record from which a transcript for appeal may be prepared, a defendant's right of appellate review is rendered meaningless. A slight inaccuracy in a record or an inconsequential omission from it which is immaterial to a proper determination of the appeal would not cause us to reverse defendant's conviction. But where a defendant's attorney is unable, through no fault of his own, to review a substantial portion of the trial record for errors so that he may properly perform his duty as appellate counsel, the interests of justice require that a defendant be afforded a new, fully-recorded trial. Id. at 110 . See also State v. Bright, XXXX-XXXX (La. App. 4 Cir. 2/6/02), 809 So.2d 1112 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 844 So. 2d 1060 - State v. Walker

3. “[W]e must reverse because it could not be determined what was in the missing excerpts. We cannot determine whether the missing evidence was not crucial to the defense or could be gleaned from other sources. This court cannot review whether the defense conducted a thorough cross-examination of the “missing” witnesses. We cannot conclude on the record before us that the defense was unable to establish internal inconsistencies in their stories, or aspects of their stories that were inconsistent with the testimony of the other witnesses.”

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