State v. Saldana’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 120 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 133 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably 36 Cal. 3d 236 - People v. Bledsoe (1984), United States v. Azure (1986)
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 120 state decisions — followed in 31 states
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. Mazurie · United States v. Barnard · State v. MacK · Cartera v. Commonwealth · Matter of Pittsburgh Action Against Rape
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 133 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Permitting a person in the role of an expert to suggest that because the complainant exhibits some of the symptoms of rape trauma syndrome, the complainant was therefore raped, unfairly prejudices the appellant by creating an aura of special reliability and trustworthiness. Since jurors of ordinary abilities are competent to consider the evidence and determine whether the alleged crime occurred, the danger of unfair prejudice outweighs any probative value. To allow such testimony would inevitably lead to a battle of experts that would invade the jury's province of fact-finding and add confusion rather than clarity.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Clark v. State · State v. McQuillen“If the subject of the testimony is within the knowledge and experience of a lay jury and the testimony of the expert will not add precision or depth to the jury’s ability to reach conclusions about that subject which is within their experience, then the testimony does not meet the helpfulness test.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brovold · Scott v. Johnson“reached a level of reliability that surpasses the quality of common sense evaluation present in jury deliberation.”
6 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.