Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 308 NJSUPER 421 - State v. Allen

State v. Allen’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
August 2016
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently August 2016

13 state decisions

60199820002010decided

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 Allen v. United States · Davis v. United States · State v. Koedatich · State v. Martin · State v. Grunow

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

  1. “[e]rroneous instructions on matters material to the juror's deliberations are presumed to be reversible error.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Evidence, including a witness' statement or testimony prior to the trial, showing that at a prior time a witness has said something which is inconsistent with the witness' testimony at the trial may be considered by you for the purpose of judging the witness' credibility. It may also be considered by you as substantive evidence, that is, as proof of the truth of what is stated in the prior contradictory statement. Evidence has been presented showing that at a prior time a witness has said something or has failed to say something which is inconsistent with the witness' testimony at the trial. This evidence may be considered by you as substantive evidence or proof of the truth of the prior contradictory statement or omitted statement ....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The charge to the jury is the road map for the jury to follow in its quest for the truth. State v. Martin, 119 N.J. 2, 15 , 573 A. 2d 1359 (1990). There is little room for shortcuts or abbreviated charges which preclude the jury from finding its way.”
    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.