Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 274 Ga. 751 - Lane v. State

Lane v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
November 2006
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Scott v. State · Duckworth v. State · Kennebrew v. State · Smith v. State · 195 Ga. App. 537 - Warnock 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) If, under the guise of cross-examination, a defendant reads from the portions of a prior written statement of a witness that are not related to impeaching the witness, the defendant has effectively introduced evidence to the jury that should have been formally offered into evidence and the defendant therefore loses the right to open and close final arguments; (2) if a defendant reads only the portions of the prior written statement of a witness that are relevant to impeaching the witness, the defendant has not introduced evidence and does not lose the right to open and close; and (3) if a defendant, in impeaching a witness with a prior inconsistent statement, voluntarily introduces the statement into evidence in order to make it a part of the record, the defendant has introduced evidence and has lost the right to open and close final arguments. [7]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “open and conclude the argument to the jury after the evidence on the part of the state is closed.”
    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.