State v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
16 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · United States v. Wade · Rock v. Arkansas · Frye v. United States · Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Inc. v. Blankenship
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Phillips v. Gelpke“(1) the testimony of reliable or knowledgeable experts; (2) authoritative scientific literature; [and] (3) persuasive judicial decisions which acknowledge such general acceptance of expert testimony.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“that procedural safeguards [could not] guard effectively against the risks associated with hypnotically refreshed testimony.”
1 later decision 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.