State v. Lund’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
November 2006
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Davis v. Alaska · State v. Catsam · State v. Patnaude · State v. French · State v. Beckenbach
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]f the evidence is not relevant or unduly prejudicial, it is inadmissible and the Confrontation Clause may not be invoked to change that result.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Willis“The trial court has discretion in determining whether evidence is relevant and admissible.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Willis
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.