Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 352 S.C. 552 - State v. Thompson

State v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
1
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

40 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on In re Martin-Trigona · City of Los Angeles v. Preferred Communications, Inc. · Alford v. United States · Williams v. United States · State v. Torrence

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

  1. “Evidence is not hearsay unless it is an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. State v. Sims, 304 S.C. 409 , 405 S.E.2d 377 (1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1103 , 112 S.Ct. 1193 , 117 L.Ed.2d 434 (1992). Additionally, an out of court statement is not hearsay if it is offered for the limited purpose of explaining why a government investigation was undertaken. United States v. Love, 767 F.2d 1052 (1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1081 , 106 S.Ct. 848 , 849, 88 L.Ed.2d 890 (1986). Here, these statements were not entered for their truth but rather to explain why the officers began their surveillance. These statements are not hearsay and, therefore, the trial judge committed no error in allowing these statements into evidence.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[A] vague reference to a defendant's prior criminal record is not sufficient to justify a mistrial where there is no attempt by the State to introduce evidence that the accused has been convicted of other crimes.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “A mistrial should not be granted unless absolutely necessary.”
    1 later decision 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.