Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 228 Ga. App. 16 - McBee v. State

228 Ga. App. 16 - McBee v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
states following
November 2021
most recently cited

30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably 255 Ga. App. 390 - Glass v. State (2002), 230 Ga. App. 846 - Brooks v. State (1998)

30 state decisions

1301997200020102020decided

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 Terry v. Ohio · Williams v. State · 195 Ga. App. 463 - Grant v. State · Mallory v. State · Felker v. State

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

  1. “With regard to appellant’s assertion that he was denied his right to confront this witness, we note that this Court, in Moore v. State, 207 Ga. App. [412, 417 ( 427 SE2d 779 ) (1993)], held that when victims of crimes for which appellant had pled guilty were unavailable, it was not error to admit police officers’ testimony regarding the victims’ prior statements to the officers. “By pleading guilty to these crimes, appellant waived his earlier opportunity to cross-examine the victim when they made the complaints against him.” Id. at 417 (2). Appellant, in admitting to the commission of the [armed robbery] of the witness as described in the indictment, waived his right to challenge the witness’ statements regarding the incident. Therefore, the admission of the evidence did not violate appellant’s right under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and there was no error in admitting the statements under the necessity exception of OCGA § 24-3-1 (b). Id.”
    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.