People v. Branch’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A midtestimony conference may be a strategic maneuver designed to frustrate the other side’s case, or it may be an important step toward making sure a flustered witness does not inadvertently misstate the facts. The trial court is in the best position to distinguish between the two. Its ruling necessarily turns on judgments we, as an appellate court, cannot easily make from a cold record: the apparent condition of the witness, the possible motivation of the attorney, the likelihood of undue delay, and the probability that cross-examination will be an adequate remedy. To unduly limit a trial court’s discretionary power in matters concerning trial management increases the likelihood that rigid rules will replace common sense and that the truth-seeking function of a trial will be impaired not advanced.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 31 Va. App. 571 - Will v. Commonwealth

2. “the truth-seeking function of a trial will most often be best served by requiring that the witness undergo direct questioning and cross-examination without interruption for counseling.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Buckham v. State

3. “[D]efense counsel had ample opportunity to cross-examine [the witness] about the interview by the prosecutor, yet no counsel was able to establish that [he] was coached.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Buckham v. State