State v. Robinson’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably State v. DeJesus (2008), State v. Morgan (2002)
39 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 Carnegie v. United States · Scharffe v. Perkins · Geders v. United States · Keene Corp. v. United States · Perry v. Leeke
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Sequestration serves a broad purpose. It is a procedural device that serves to prevent witnesses from tailoring their testimony to that of earlier witnesses; it aids in detecting testimony that is less than candid and assures that witnesses testify on the basis of their own knowledge.... In essence, it helps to ensure that the trial is fair.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he right to have witnesses sequestered is an important right that facilitates the truth seeking and fact-finding functions of a trial”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. DeJesus“there was no evidentiary foundation by which to gauge [its] accuracy....”
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.