Escalera v. Coombe’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[The district court judge] did note in his opinion below that the attorney’s “apparent bad faith — or, at least, the absence of a good excuse — [wa]s evident” in the failure properly to give notice of his intent to call [an alibi witness]. But this alone is not enough. The absence of a good excuse is not necessarily commensurate with “willful ” conduct and it is not readily clear whether Escalera’s attorney was, in fact, motivated by a desire to obtain a tactical advantage.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 234 F. Supp. 2d 231 - Bohan v. Kuhlmann · Casim Noble v. Walter R. Kelly, Superintendent

2. “1. At any time, not more than twenty days after arraignment, the people may serve upon the defendant or his counsel, and file a copy thereof with the court, a demand that if the defendant intends to offer a trial defense that at the time of the commission of the crime charged he was at some place or places other than the scene of the crime, and to call witnesses in support of such defense he must, within eight days of service of such demand, serve upon the people, and file a copy thereof with the court, a "notice of alibi,” reciting (a) the place or places where the defendant claims to have been at the time in question, and (b) the names, the residential addresses, the places of employment and the addresses thereof of every such alibi witness upon whom he intends to rely. For good cause shown, the court may extend the period for service of the notice. ****** 3. If at the trial the defendant calls such an alibi witness without having served the demanded notice of alibi, or if having served such a notice he calls a witness not specified therein, the court may exclude any testimony of such witness relating to the alibi defense. The court may in its discretion receive such testimony, but before doing so, it must, upon application of the people, grant an adjournment not in excess of three days.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Walker v. Hood

3. “[Assuming without deciding that the errors are subject to harmless error analysis, we consider whether the preclusion sanction ... was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. We look to the “ ‘probable impact of the [errors] on the minds of the average jury’ ” to determine “ ‘whether there is a reasonable possibility’ that the error affected the jury’s verdict.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Walker v. Hood