Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 139 Ga. App. 347 - Crawford v. State

139 Ga. App. 347 - Crawford v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
states following
January 2010
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 2010

20 state decisions

11019761980199020002010decided

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 Merino v. State · Hall v. Hopper · Grace v. State · Morgan v. State · Alexander v. State

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.

  1. “Ordinarily, prior extrajudicial statements consistent with a witness’ testimony are inadmissible. [Cits.]. But where counsel imputes to the witness an intent to fabricate from some motive, interest or relationship, it may be shown that the witness made a consistent statement at a time when the motive or interest did not exist. [Cits.]” Crawford v. State, 139 Ga. App. 347, 350 (3) ( 228 SE2d 371 ) (1976). Although the prior statement included a reference to Mullins’ character (”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.