Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 271 Or. 153 - State v. Green

State v. Green’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
8
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably 149 Ill. 2d 423 - People v. Melock (1992), 101 Wash. 2d 664 - State v. Rupe (1984)

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

14019751980199020002010decided

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.

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

  1. “For the reasons previously stated, we must remand this case for a new trial. The new trial, however, will be limited to the question whether at the time of killing the two girls, defendant acted under an `extreme mental or emotional disturbance,' so as to be guilty of manslaughter, rather than of murder.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “general scientific acceptance as a reliable and accurate means of ascertaining truth or deception,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"[E]vidence of the results of polygraph tests is not admissible as substantive evidence to prove that a person has lied or told the truth. Nevertheless, the jury is likely to infer from evidence of the fact that a criminal defendant was the subject of a polygraph test before making a confession that he lied in response to questions asked during a polygraph test and that he confessed because he was caught lying by the polygraph. As a result, there is danger that such evidence may unduly prejudice the jury in its consideration of the credibility of such a defendant. "The same is also true, in our opinion, and for the same reasons, of evidence of the results of a polygraph examination and evidence relating to the details of a polygraph examination, from which the jury is even more likely to draw the same inferences. "For these reasons, it is our opinion that the danger of prejudice from the impact of such evidence upon the question of the credibility of a defendant is so great as to ordinarily outweigh the probative value of such evidence as one or more of the circumstances which the state may properly offer in evidence in laying the initial foundation for the admission of a confession during the trial of a criminal case." 271 Or. at 168-69 , 531 P.2d 245 . (Footnote omitted.)”
    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.