Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 316 N.C. 337 - State v. Heath

State v. Heath’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

88
cited by 88 later decisions
4
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

86 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably State v. Kennedy (1987), State v. Jones (1994)

86 state decisions

3201986199020002010decided

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. Binder · State v. Sills · State v. Brown · State v. Keen

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

  1. “[Prosecutor:] ... [D]o you have an opinion satisfactory to yourself as to whether or not [the victim] was suffering from any type of mental condition in early June of 1983, or a mental condition which could or might have caused her to make up a story about the sexual assault? .... [Expert:] There is nothing in the record or current behavior that indicates that she has a record of lying.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) Reputation or Opinion. In all cases in which evidence of character ... is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or ... in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct. Expert testimony on character or a trait of character is not admissible as circumstantial evidence of behavior.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(a) Opinion and reputation evidence of character.— The credibility of a witness may be attacked or supported by evidence in the form of reputation or opinion as provided in Rule 405(a), but subject to these limitations: (1) the evidence may refer only to character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, and (2) evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the character of the witness for truthfulness has been attacked by opinion or reputation evidence or otherwise.”
    2 later decisions 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.