Smith v. Deppish’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
2 district · 73 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently September 2013 · most notably Kelly v. State (1992), 120 Wash. 2d 879 - State v. Cauthron (1993)
2 district · 73 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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 Batson v. Kentucky · Barker v. Wingo · Frye v. United States · Stayton v. Stayton · People v. Castro
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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Here, the State relied not only on its observance of Seldon’s body language, but also considered her response to the jury questionnaire that she did not want to be part of the jury process. Neither Smith nor the record provides information that any of the other jurors had given a similar reply in their questionnaire. Based on the record, the State offered the trial court a sufficient race neutral explanation to exclude Seldon from the jury.” 248 Kan. at 229 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The Frye test requires that, before expert scientific opinion may be received in evidence, the basis of that opinion must be shown to be generally accepted as reliable within the expert’s particular scientific field. If a new scientific technique’s validity has not been generally accepted as reliable or is only regarded as an experimental technique, then expert testimony based on its results should not be admitted into evidence. [Citation omitted.]””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Witte““DNA print testing and the process of Restriction Fragment [Length] Polymorphism analysis have been recognized as rehable, have gained general acceptance in the scientific community, involve scientifically and professionally established techniques, and thus, meet the criteria for admissibility under the standard set forth in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).” Deppish, 248 Kan. 217 , Syl. ¶ 6.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Isley
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.