Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 401 A2D 943 - State v. Rooks

State v. Rooks’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
2
states following
December 2015
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably Bailey v. State (1987), Capano v. State (2001)

2 federal appellate · 33 state decisions

15019791980199020002010decided

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 Townsend v. Sain · Jackson v. Denno · Mincey v. Arizona · Lego v. Twomey · Rogers v. Richmond

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

  1. “(a) In a criminal prosecution, the voluntary out-of-court prior statement of a witness who is present and subject to cross-examination may be used as affirmative evidence with substantive independent testimonial value. (b) The rule in subsection (a) of this section shall apply regardless of whether the witness’ in-court testimony is consistent with the prior statement or not. The rule shall likewise apply with or without a showing of surprise by the introducing party. (c) This section shall not be construed to affect the rules concerning the admission of statements of defendants or of those who are codefendants in the same trial. This section shall also not apply to the statements of those whom to cross-examine would be to subject to possible self-incrimination.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Factors which bear on these circumstances include the following; 'the youth of the [declarant]; his lack of education or his low intelligence; the lack of any advice to the [declarant] of his constitutional rights; the length of detention; the repeated and prolonged nature of the questioning; and the use of physical punishment such as the deprivation of food or sleep,’”
    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.