State v. Shuford’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently February 2013
20 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 State v. Odom · State v. Weeks · State v. Riddick · State v. Simpson · State v. Reynolds
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Defendant made no showing that the proffered opinion testimony was rationally based on the perception of the witness or that it would be helpful to a determination of the issue of the distance from which the victim was shot. In fact, as noted above, defense counsel candidly admitted to the court that he knew nothing about the witness' qualifications, except the witness' place of employment and that he signed the ambulance call report. At oral argument, defendant acknowledged that a layperson could provide this type of opinion testimony "if he was familiar with guns and gunshot wounds." Yet, no such information regarding the qualifications of the witness to provide this opinion testimony was presented to the trial court. Further, defendant declined an invitation by the trial court to locate the witness and obtain some information that would support his qualification to testify on this subject.... [D]efendant certainly had the opportunity to provide support for the witness testifying as a lay witness or as an expert.... Defendant has failed to demonstrate that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to admit this testimony without some showing that the witness was qualified to testify, either as a lay witness or as an expert.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“If the State proves beyond a reasonable doubt, (or it is admitted) that the defendant intentionally killed the victim with a deadly weapon or intentionally inflicted a wound upon the deceased with a deadly weapon that proximately caused the victim’s death, you may infer first, that the killing was unlawful, and second, that it was done with malice, but you are not compelled to do so.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Cummings“is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (b) helpful to a clear understanding of his testimony or the determination of a fact in issue.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Washington
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.