Nance v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
2 district · 109 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 111 later decisions — most recently November 2020 · most notably State v. Newsome (1996), 12 Cal. 4th 252 - People v. Cuevas (1995)
2 district · 109 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 California v. Green · Kentucky v. Stincer · Castor v. United States · Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Pemberton · United States v. Owens
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 111 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The following statements previously made by a witness who testifies at the trial or hearing and who is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement are not excluded by the hearsay rule: (a) A statement that is inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony, if the statement was (1) given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding^,] or in a deposition; (2) reduced to writing and signed [or otherwise adopted or approved] by the declarant; or (3) recorded in substantially verbatim fashion by stenographic!, mechanical, electrical, or other] or electronic means contemporaneously with the making of the statement....””
11 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Sheppard v. State · Tyler v. State“We hold that the factual portion of an inconsistent out-of-court statement is sufficiently trustworthy to be offered as substantive evidence of guilt when the statement is based on the declarant’s own knowledge of the facts, is reduced to writing and signed or otherwise adopted by him, and he is subject to cross-examination at the trial where the prior statement is introduced. (Footnote omitted.)”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“[A] statement given before a grand jury is made in an atmosphere of formality impressing upon the declarant the need for accuracy; and it will be memorialized in a manner that eliminates concerns about whether the statement was actually made.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Stewart v. State · Makell v. State
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.