Bushnell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"In the case at bar, appellant, in cross-examining his accomplice Sloan, attempted to elicit the facts that Sloan was on parole in Texas, that he harbored tremendous fears of returning there as well as hopes that the Nevada authorities might not compel his return if he testified favorably for the prosecution against appellant. This was neither repetitive, irrelevant, vague, speculative, nor designed to harass, annoy or humiliate, but was clearly proper inquiry on cross-examination of an accomplice to show bias It was error to restrict appellant's cross-examination of Sloan to actual promises made by the prosecution."”

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

2. “[the bounds of the trial court's discretion are limited too by the well-founded rule that the widest latitude be given a defendant in cross-examining an accomplice as to his motives for testifying.”

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

3. “However, the trial court's discretion is more narrow where bias is the object to be shown, and an examiner must be permitted to elicit any facts which might color a witness's testimony.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Baltazar-Monterrosa v. State