Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 273 SO2D 261 - State v. Odom

State v. Odom’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
June 2003
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently June 2003

9 state decisions

701973198019902000decided

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 Schmerber v. State of California · Gilbert v. California · State v. Gladden · State v. Dundas · State v. Thompson

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

  1. “"Evidence of conviction of crime, but not of arrest, indictment or prosecution, is admissible for the purpose of impeaching the credibility of the witness, but before evidence of such former conviction can be adduced from any other source than the witness whose credibility is to be impeached, he must have been questioned on cross-examination as to such conviction, and have failed distinctly to admit the same; and no witness, whether he be defendant or not, can be asked on cross-examination whether or not he has ever been indicted or arrested, and can only be questioned as to conviction, and as provided herein." R.S. 15:462 provides: "When a person accused, or a husband or wife becomes a witness, such witness shall be subject to all the rules that apply to other witnesses, and may be cross-examined upon the whole case."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In the proper case we should exclude the introduction of other convictions for the purpose of impeachment and as an attack upon credibility unless the convictions are of offenses which, by their very nature, charge perjury, falsification, or lack of truthfulness.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “conduct which is defined as criminal in this Code, or in other acts of the legislature, or in the constitution of this state.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.