Lancaster v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
67 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Dysthe v. State (2003), Byron Nelson Griggs v. State (2016)
67 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 · Terry v. Ohio · Escobedo v. Illinois · Negron v. United States · Griffith v. United States
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Determining whether the trial court abused its discretion involves the consideration of whether the court could reasonably conclude as it did, and whether it acted in an arbitrary or capricious manner.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Tombroek v. State · Young v. State“(1) that the declarant testify at trial; (2) that the declarant be subject to cross-examination concerning the prior statement; (3) that the prior statement be consistent with the declarant's trial testimony; and (4) that the prior statement be offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Tombroek v. State · Jones v. State“[t]he charge of fabrication or improper motive need not come only as a specific allegation during cross-examination; ... it may be made by implication or innuendo, and it may be found in the thrust of the defenses and testimony presented.”
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.