State v. Day’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘(1) [The defendant] may become embarrassed or confounded in presenting separate defenses; (2) the jury may use the evidence of one of the crimes charged to infer a criminal disposition on the part of the defendant from which it found his guilt of the other crime or crimes charged; or (3) the jury may cumulate the evidence of the various crimes charged and find guilt when, if considered separately, it would not so find.’ ” Rivera, 987 A.2d at 900 (quoting Pereira, 973 A.2d at 28 ).”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Pereira · State v. CIRESI

2. “"[i]f it appears that a defendant or the State is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses or of defendants in an indictment, information, or complaint or by such joinder for trial ■ together, the court may order an election or separate trials of counts, grant a severance of defendants or provide whatever other relief justice requires."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Pereira · State v. CIRESI