Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 137 N.J. 434 - State v. DiFrisco

State v. DiFrisco’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

147
cited by 147 later decisions
11
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

147 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 147 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably State v. Stenson (1997), State v. Marshall (1997)

147 state decisions — followed in 11 states

680199420002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Batson v. Kentucky · Hill v. Lockhart · Wainwright v. Witt · Swain v. State of Alabama

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

  1. “Only where there is a `clear error of judgment' should the `trial court's conclusion with respect to that balancing test' be disturbed.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the disposition of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. Such evidence may be admitted for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity or absence of mistake or accident when such matters are relevant to a material issue in dispute.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “(1) that the trial court erred by failing to remove a juror for cause; (2) that the juror in question was eliminated by the exercise of defendant's peremptory challenge and that defendant exhausted his peremptory challenges; and (3) at least one of the remaining jurors that sat on the jury was a partial juror.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.