Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2002 UT 86 - State v. Calliham

State v. Calliham’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
2
states following
July 2025
most recently cited

55 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently July 2025 · most notably State v. Worwood (2007), State v. Jeffs (2010)

55 state decisions

400200220102020decided

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 Chapman v. State of California · Bruton v. United States · Ohio v. Roberts · Harrington v. California · Richardson v. Marsh

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

  1. “having personally observed the quality of the evidence, the tenor of the proceedings, and the demeanor of the parties, is in a better position to perceive the subtleties at issue than [an appellate court] looking only at the cold record.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Notwithstanding error by the trial court [in admitting evidence], we will not reverse a conviction if we find that the error was harmless.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “accomplice liability adheres only when the accused acts with the mens rea to commit the principal offense.”
    4 later decisions 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.