State v. McLaughlin’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently August 2011
19 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 United States v. Carlson · State v. Triplett · United States v. Bailey · United States v. West · J. H. Rose Truck Line, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Whether the proponent of the hearsay provided proper notice to the adverse party of his intent to offer it and of its particulars; (2) That the statement is not covered by any of the exceptions listed in Rule 804(b)(l)-(4); (3) That the statement possesses “equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness”; (4) That the proffered statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; (5) Whether the hearsay is “more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can produce through reasonable means”; and (6) Whether “the general purposes of [the] rules [of evidence] and the interests of justice will best be served by admission of the statement into evidence.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Nichols · State v. Fowler“A trial judge should consider a number of factors in determining whether a hearsay statement possesses sufficient indicia of trustworthiness to be admitted under Rule 804(b)(5). Among these factors are: (1) the declarant's personal knowledge of the underlying event; (2) the declarant's motivation to speak the truth; (3) whether the declarant recanted; and (4) the reason, within the meaning of Rule 804(a), for the declarant's unavailability.... [T]his list is not inclusive and ... other factors may be considered when appropriate. Among the many factors which courts have considered are the existence of corroborating evidence, and the degree to which the proffered testimony has elements of enumerated exceptions to the hearsay rule.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“To be admissible under the residual exception to the hearsay rule, the hearsay statement must possess `guarantees of trustworthiness' that are equivalent to the other exceptions contained in Rule 804(b).”
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.