State v. Vigil’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ * * *. We agree with the decision of the Court of Appeals under the particular facts of that case, and agree with the statement in its opinion that ‘once the witness has testified at the criminal trial about that which he testified before the grand jury, the accused is entitled to an order permitting examination of that portion of the witness’ grand jury testimony relating to the crime for which defendant is charged.’ ””

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

2. ““' * * *. The state has no interest in denying the accused access to all evidence that can throw light on issues in the case, and, in particular, the state should have no interest in convicting on the testimony of witnesses who have not been as rigorously cross-examined and as throroughly impeached as the evidence permits.’ State v. Morgan, supra, at 67 N.M. 292 , 354 P.2d 1006 ; * *”

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

3. “There can be no valid reason for requiring the defendant to show a particularized need for the grand jury testimony of a witness who has already appeared and testified publicly in the criminal trial.”

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