Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 278 ORAPP 54 - State v. Engle

State v. Engle’s Empirical Analysis

2016

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

4 state decisions

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

  1. “In reviewing a trial court's admission of eyewitness identification evidence, we defer to the court's findings of fact as long as they are supported by any evidence in the record.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “were inherently suggestive. Further, he argues that, even if the identification evidence did meet that threshold requirement, it should have been excluded under OEC 403 as unduly prejudicial. We conclude that the trial court did not err in admitting the out-of-court identification and permitting the in-court identification, and therefore we affirm.”
    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.