Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 303 NJSUPER 266 - State v. McNeil

State v. McNeil’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
December 2010
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently December 2010

14 state decisions

80199720002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Neil v. Biggers · Manson v. Brathwaite · State v. Green · State v. Kociolek

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

  1. “whether th[at] omission requires reversal is highly fact-sensitive.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]t is well settled that when identification is the crucial issue in the case, the defendant is entitled to a discrete and specific instruction, providing `appropriate guidelines' and `focussing the jury's attention on how to analyze and consider the factual issues with regard to the trustworthiness of [the eyewitnesses's] in-court identification.'”
    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.