2011 UT App 23 - State v. Willey’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
September 2020
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · State v. Litherland · Kimball v. Kimball · State v. Clopten · State v. Thomas
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“During their consultation, the memory expert further inquired whether there was a paper trail of any other independent or contemporaneous complaints made against Willey for inappropriate or sexual touching and opined that, if there were, such evidence would significantly undermine a memory confabulation defense. The memory expert also candidly explained that given the corroborating evidence available before the first trial, he could be compelled to testify under cross-examination by the State that the Child's memory of sexual abuse did not appear to be the result of contamination. [The attorneys were] further concerned that a memory expert's testimony would potentially open the door to admission of [testimony from witnesses who claimed to have seen Willey touch other students].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Willey v. Bugden“While Clopten certainly suggests that . it may be wise or even expected in appropriate cases to. present expert testimony on the inherent weaknesses of eyewitness ... testimony, it does not go so far as to imply that a failure to do so presumptively renders counsel ineffective without regard for the circumstances of a particular case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Heywood“was formed through consultation with a memory expert [the attorneys] had used in several other cases. - Before the first trial, [the attorneys] discussed with this expert the potential benefits and detriments of using a memory confabulation defense under the facts of this case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Willey v. Bugden
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.