State v. Farrow’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
2 district · 33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably 2 Cal. 4th 408 - People v. Mincey (1992), 367 Pa. Super. 484 - Commonwealth v. Kyle (1987)
2 district · 33 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 Davis v. Alaska · State v. Keyes
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the defendant’s right is limited to the use of such materials as are found to be essential and reasonably necessary to permit counsel adequately to cross-examine for the purpose of showing unreliability or bias. To prevent abuse and to protect the witnesses from unnecessary embarrassment the trial court should examine with counsel the records and other materials in question and determine what parts, if any, the defendant will be permitted to use.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Guay · In Re Ct
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.