State v. Haglund’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently May 2009
13 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 United States v. Wiggins · State v. Richmond · State v. Holbrook
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We do not agree with this approach. As stated in United States v. Wiggins, 166 U.S.App.D.C. 121, 129 , 509 F.2d 454, 462 (1975), “the law is plain that evidence of other offenses committed by a defendant is not automatically made admissible because the defendant referred to those offenses in a confession.” Generally, the defendant’s references in a confession to prior crimes, or to his prior imprisonment should be excised unless there is some good reason for not doing so, as when the evidence is admissible under one of the exceptions to the exclusionary rule or when the confession is unintelligible if the reference to the other offense is omitted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hjerstrom“[E]ven when the elicitation is unintentional, we will reverse if the evidence is prejudicial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Flowers
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.