State v. Wallace’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

38 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"We have repeatedly ruled upon pretrial discovery in criminal cases. In State ex rel. Mahoney v. Superior Court of Maricopa County, 78 Ariz. 74 , 275 P.2d 887 , we examined extensively into the question of whether the State should be required to produce for inspection certain documents, papers and tangible objects. We pointed out that under the common law a defendant had no right of discovery. We concluded, however, that even where Rule 195, Rules of Criminal Procedure, 17 A.R.S., was not applicable, the court had the inherent power, where the due administration of justice required, to order discovery of papers, documents and other tangible objects. In Mahoney, supra, we permitted the inspection of certain tangible objects as demonstrative evidence but denied discovery of papers and documents which were not and could not be evidence in themselves. We said: "`The defense has no right to go upon a tour of investigation, in the hope that they will find something to aid them, * * * and if it appears that the request for such inspection is merely "a fishing expedition to see what may turn up" it should be denied.' 78 Ariz. 74, 79 , 275 P.2d 887, 890 ." 97 Ariz. at 299 , 399 P.2d at 912 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Superior Court · State v. Superior Court