Hendrix v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “First, it must be determined whether the evidence would have played a significant role in the defendant’s case. To play a significant role, the exculpatory nature and value of the evidence must have been apparent before the evidence was lost. The second part of the test requires that the defendant have no way of obtaining comparable evidence by other means.... [A] third consideration is whether the [government] acted in bad faith in failing to preserve the potentially exculpatory evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 47 So. 3d 203 - Chapman v. State

2. “Testimony of an accomplice, even when uncorroborated, can be sufficient to support a verdict of guilt. Catchings v. State, 394 So.2d 869 , 870 (Miss.1981). However, “where [accomplice testimony] is uncorroborated, it must also be reasonable, not improbable, self-contradictory or substantially impeached.” Jones v. State, 740 So.2d 904, 910 (¶ 17) (Miss. 1999) (quoting Jones v. State, 368 So.2d 1265, 1267 (Miss.1979)).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 13 So. 3d 301 - Spurlock v. State