Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 452 NW2D 610 - State v. Dodson

State v. Dodson’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
5
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 89 N.C. App. 212 - State v. Bailey · People v. Bowker · State v. Myers · 211 Cal. App. 3d 144 - People v. Bergschneider · 208 Cal. App. 3d 721 - People v. Sanchez

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

  1. “[W]here a child delays a significant period of time before reporting an incident or pattern of abuse, an expert could testify that such delayed reporting is not inconsistent with the secretive environment often created by an abuser who occupies a position of trust. Where an alleged victim recants his story in whole or in part, a psychologist could testify on the basis of past research that such behavior is not an uncommon response for an abused child who is seeking to remove himself or herself from the pressure created by police investigations and subsequent court proceedings.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “No blanket rule can be adopted on this issue. There may be, however, instances in which expert testimony may explain why children delay reporting sexual abuse or do not appear to be fearful of the perpetrator. Such evidence, if admissible, must be limited strictly to rehabilitative functions ... and the fact finder must be instructed that the testimony is limited to rehabilitation and is not to be used as substantive evidence of abuse. [Citation omitted.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The problem with this type of evidence is it may incorrectly be used by the fact finder as evidence of abuse. There is a very fine line between an opinion that is helpful to a jury and an opinion that merely conveys a conclusion concerning defendant's guilt. [Citations omitted.]”
    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.