Pope v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
September 2010
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Woodard v. State · 226 Ga. App. 254 - Taylor v. State · 178 Ga. App. 742 - Whisnant v. State · 186 Ga. App. 892 - Palmer 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]his argument misconstrues what it means for a witness’s veracity to be attacked. “(A) witness’s veracity is placed in issue so as to permit the introduction of a prior consistent statement only if affirmative charges of recent fabrication, improper influence, or improper motive are raised during cross-examination.” Woodard[v. State], 269 Ga. [317, 320 (2) ( 496 SE2d 896 ) (1998)]. Further, “(u)nless a witness’s veracity has affirmatively been placed in issue, the witness’s prior consistent statement is pure hearsay evidence, which cannot be admitted merely to corroborate the witness, or to bolster the witness’s credibility in the eyes of the jury.”... 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.