State v. Ohlson’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
3
states following
October 2007
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Crawford v. Washington · Lane v. Peterson · Adair v. United States · 119 Wash. 2d 401 - State v. Strauss · 122 Cal. App. 4th 461 - People v. Corella
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a vehicle . . . had gone by and flipped them off and, I quote "called them [racial slurs]" and sped off. The vehicle then came back around and actually swerved up on to the curb trying to hit them. . . . They had to literally jump out of the way so that they were not hit. This continued, they said, at least four times, where the car went back and forth in front of them, calling them racial names.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ohlson · State v. Ohlson“no testimony was provided directly from D.L. to indicate that a startling event occurred from his perspective. " Appellant's Pet. to Review at 5 (emphasis added). But, as the Court of Appeals correctly stated, while the focus is on the declarant's perception in analyzing whether a startling event has occurred, "the declarant need not testify regarding his perception of the event in order to establish this requirement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ohlson“Three requirements must be met for a statement to qualify as an excited utterance: (1) a startling event or condition must have occurred; (2) the statement must have been made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition; and (3) the statement must relate to the startling event or condition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bird
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.