State v. Eugene’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably 9 Cal. 4th 1178 - People v. Bruner (1995), 111 Wash. 2d 124 - State v. Brown (1988)
27 state decisions — followed in 10 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 Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Agurs · Moore v. Illinois · Amperex Electronic Corp. v. New York Racing Assn., Inc. · United States v. Augenblick
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) General Rule. For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, (i) evidence that a witness other than an accused has been convicted of a crime must be admitted, if the crime was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year under the law under which the witness was convicted, and evidence that an accused has been convicted of such a crime must be admitted if the court determines that the probative value of admitting that evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to the accused; and (ii) evidence that any witness has been convicted of a crime must be admitted if it involved dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the punishment.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“1. A person is guilty of forgery or counterfeiting if, with intent to deceive or harm the government or another person, or with knowledge that he is facilitating such deception or harm by another person, he: a. Knowingly and falsely makes, completes, or alters any writing; or b. Knowingly utters or possesses a forged or counterfeited writing. 2. Forgery or counterfeiting is: [[Image here]] b. A class C felony if: [[Image here]] (5) The offense is committed pursuant to a scheme to defraud another or others of money or property of a value in excess of one hundred dollars.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Smestad““North Dakota Rule 609, although taken from the Uniform Rules of Evidence (1974), is quite similar to its counterpart in the Federal Rules of Evidence. This is so because the Uniform Rules of Evidence were conformed to the Federal Rules of Evidence for purposes of uniformity between State and Federal evidence law. Thus, the provisions of each are almost identical. 13 Uniform Rules of Evidence (U.L.A.) pp. 209-13.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Farzaneh
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.