Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2006 UT App 178 - State v. Harper

2006 UT App 178 - State v. Harper’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently March 2026

11 state decisions

50200620102020decided

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 · State v. Dunn · State v. Clark · State v. Hamilton · State v. Bullock

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

  1. “may reasonably have believed it ill-advised to call undue attention to the unanticipated testimony ... [and thus] counsel's actions in ignoring the testimony may be considered sound trial strategy.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “'any testimony which would tend to dispute, explain or minimize the effect of evidence that has been given by one's opponent.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Id. On appeal, the defendant argued that this testimony was evidence of the victim's truthfulness on a particular occasion and was inadmissible under rule 608. Id. 118. However, this court concluded that the defendant had opened the door to the admission of, such evidence by eliciting testimony about the vie-tim's honesty, holding that because the defendant raised the issue of whether the witness believed the victim's story,”
    1 later decision 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.