State v. MacHado’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
1 district · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently July 2016
1 district · 19 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 Massiah v. United States · Huggins v. Raines · Bottone v. United States · United States v. Brown · State v. Baldwin
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“admissible as background to establish the nature of the relationship between the victim and the defendant.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“As to the facts, the State argues that the victim's state of mind was relevant because the defendant placed his relationship with the victim in issue by claiming that the relationship was a good one. The challenged statements, however, were offered by the State and admitted into evidence through various witnesses on the State's direct case. Of necessity, this occurred before the defendant offered any evidence about his relationship with the victim. Hence, the State is simply wrong in trying to justify the admission of the hearsay statements for the asserted reason that the defendant placed that relationship in issue. [ Id. at 487 , 545 A. 2d 174 (emphasis added).]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Declarations by the victim of the crime, or by the accused prior to the criminal event, are admitted notwithstanding their ‘hearsay’ character. Generally the basis for accepting such testimony is that the behavior of both the victim and the defendant are part of the mosaic of the criminal event, and hence, insofar as their declarations bear upon either the quality of their acts or a relevant state of mind, they must be accepted as part and parcel of the critical scene. [ 47 N.J. at 394 , 221 A.2d 199 ].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Benedetto
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.