State v. Snell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Some of the factors to be weighed in the balance include the promptness of the continuance motion and the length of time requested; the age and intricacy of the case; the inconvenience to the parties, witnesses, jurors, counsel, and the court; whether the request appears to be legitimate or merely contrived foot dragging; whether the defendant contributed to the circumstances giving rise to the request; whether the defendant in fact has other competent and prepared trial counsel ready to pinch-hit; whether there are multiple codefen-dants, making calendar control more difficult than usual; and any other relevant factor made manifest by the record.” Id. (quoting State v. Moran, 699 A.2d 20, 26 (R.I.1997)).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Navarro · State v. Bido

2. “"Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.””

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

3. “his rights to confrontation under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and [a]rticle [1], [s]ec[tion] 10 of the Rhode Island Constitution were violated by the admission of testimony from [Quartaro] as to the results of DNA analysis performed by others.”

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