State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably State v. Turner (1981), State v. Bryant (1987)
28 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 Bruton v. United States · Jackson v. Denno · Chambers v. Mississippi · Mincey v. Arizona · Sims v. State of Georgia
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the declarant must be unavailable as a witness; (2) the statement must so far tend to subject the declarant to criminal liability that a reasonable person in [his] position would not have made the statement unless [he] believed it to be true; and (3) the statement must be corroborated by circumstances that “clearly” indicate its trustworthiness.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Barden · State v. Cochran“(1) the time of the declaration and the party to whom it was made; (2) the existence of corroborating evidence in the case; (3) whether the declaration is inherently inconsistent with the accused’s guilt; and (4) whether at the time of the incriminating statement the declarant had any probable motive to falsify.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Barden · State v. Cochran“(b) Hearsay exceptions. The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule if the declar-ant is unavailable as a witness: (3) Statement Against Interest. A statement which was at the time of its making so far contrary to the declarant’s pecuniary or proprietary interest, or so far tended to subject him to civil or criminal liability or to render invalid a claim by him against another or to make him an object of hatred, ridicule, or disgrace, that a reasonable man in his position would not have made the statement unless he believed it to be true. A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused is not admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement. A statement of confession offered against the accused in a criminal case, made by a code-fendant or other person implicating both himself and the accused, is not within this exception.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Boucher · State v. Priest
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.