State v. Dixon’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently April 2015 · most notably State v. Adamson (1983), State v. Noriega (1984)
52 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · California v. Green · Barber v. Page · Motes v. United States · State v. Schantz
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This State is committed to the Wigmorian view of excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. 6 Wigmore on Evidence (3rd Ed.), § 1750, p. 142, et seq. ‘These statements would obviously be hearsay unless they are admissible under the “excited utterance” or “spontaneous exclamation” exception to the hearsay rule. The requisites for an “excited utterance” are as follows: 1. There must be a startling event. 2. The words spoken must be spoken soon after the event so as not to give the person speaking the words a time to fabricate. 3. The words spoken must relate to the startling event. State v. McLain, 74 Ariz. 132 , 245 P.2d 278 (1952).’ “State v. Hunt, 2 Ariz.App. 6, 16 , 406 P.2d 208, 218 (1965).” State v. Dixon, 107 Ariz. 415 , 489 P.2d 225, 227, 228 (1971).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Kevil · State v. Morrow
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.