Vega v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
291 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 291 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably Romer v. State (2013), Davis v. State (2016)
291 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 Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · Momon v. State · Teague v. State · Harris 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 291 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'It was for the jury to determine the credibility of the witnesses and to resolve any conflicts or inconsistencies in the evidence.'”
17 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Worthen v. State · Barnes v. State““ ‘(W)here the conduct and motives of the actor are not matters concerning which the truth must be found (i.e., are irrelevant to the issues on trial) then the information, etc., on which he or she acted shall not be admissible under’ OCGA § 24-3-2. Momon v. State, [ 249 Ga. 865, 867 ( 294 SE2d 482 ) (1982)]. ‘(O)nly in rare instances will the “conduct” of an investigating officer need to be “explained!.)” ’ Teague v. State, [ 252 Ga. 534 ,] 536 (1) [( 314 SE2d 910 ) (1984)] .... Otherwise, ‘it is error to permit an investigating officer to testify, under the guise of explaining the officer’s conduct, to what other persons related to the officer during the investigation. (Cits.)’ (Cit.) The mere circumstance of an officer’s initiation and continuation of an investigation, without more, is not a relevant inquiry. (Cit.)” [Cit.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Reeves v. State“Because [Love] did not renew the request after the trial court announced its remedy, we must assume that he was satisfied with that remedy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. LOVE v. the 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.