State v. St. George’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently June 2022 · most notably State v. Williams (2002), Brown County v. Shannon R. (2005)
3 federal appellate · 53 state decisions
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 · Davis v. Alaska · Chambers v. Mississippi · Washington v. Texas · California v. Trombetta
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 60 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.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“as evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. Here, the trial court found that any testimony by Centinario as to his conversation with S.W's mother or his impression as to her attitude at the time of their meeting was outweighed by”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Miller · State v. Shomberg“(1) The testimony of the expert witness met the Wis. Stat. § 907.02 standards governing the admission of expert testimony; (2) The expert testimony was "clearly relevant to a material issue" in the case; (3) The expert testimony was necessary to the defendant's case; and (4) The probative value of the expert testimony outweighed its prejudicial effect.”
3 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.