Pitts v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably State v. Jensen (2007), Favors v. State (2015)
36 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 Crawford v. Washington · 3 Misc. 3d 739 - People v. Moscat · Moody v. State · 355 Ill. App. 3d 28 - People v. West · 4 Misc. 3d 575 - People v. Cortes
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where the primary purpose of the telephone call is to establish evidentiary facts, so that an objective person would recognize that the statement would be used in a future prosecution, then that phone call 'bears testimony' against the accused and implicates the concerns of the Confrontation Clause.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Jensen“normal rules regarding the admission of hearsay apply.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCord v. State
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.