State v. Clopten’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
53
cited by 53 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
12
states following
October 2025
most recently cited
1 federal appellate · 49 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Long · State v. Butterfield · State v. Maestas · State v. Hollen · State v. Hubbard
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'The trial court has wide discretion in determining the admissibility of expert testimony, and such decisions are reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. Under this standard, we will not reverse [a decision to admit or exclude expert testimony] unless the decision exceeds the limits of reasonability.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“In which a witness viewed the perpetrator under such ideal conditions that an expert would not be able to identify factors that could have contributed to a misidentifi-cation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Heywood“de facto presumption against the admission of eyewitness expert testimony,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Guard
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.