Maestas v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

35 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “This is because the officers' testimony as to what transpired from Appellant's arrest up to Appellant’s confession is uncontroverted. Appellant did not provide conflicting testimony or contradict the officers’ presentation of the facts in any way. In addition, Appellant did not present any complaints, for example complaints concerning the conditions of her jail cell, or complaints that she was coerced, intimidated, or forced to speak with police. Under different circumstances, where the police and the appellant provided conflicting testimony, resolution of this question would involve an evaluation of credibility and demeanor because the trial cotut would have to decide which testimony deserved more weight. In that case, our review would "afford almost total deference” to the trial court’s determination, in accordance with Guzman .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Ross · Jimenez v. State

2. “if the resolution of those ultimate questions turns on an evaluation of credibility and demeanor. Maestas, 987 S.W.2d at 62 ; Vega, 32 S.W.3d at 899 . However, we review de novo”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re EMR