461 So. 2d 16 - Thomas v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently December 2007
14 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 15 Cal. 2d 731 - People v. Kynette · 31 Cal. 2d 555 - People v. Slobodion · Seals v. State · Aaron v. State · Jackson v. Vaughn
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"This was the equivalent of allowing the officers to testify that 'Watson said Thomas is the thief.' Without question, that statement was admitted for a hearsay purpose, as evidence of 'the truth of the matter asserted,' i.e. , that Watson's identification was the truth, and thus as substantive evidence that Thomas was the thief.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"A statement which is useful in identifying a person, time, place or other thing is admissible for that purpose as a hearsay exception. The statement, of course, may not be considered as evidence of the truth of the matter asserted but only for the limited purpose of identification. " (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The general rule is that evidence by a third party of an extrajudicial identification is admissible in rebuttal of testimony tending to impeach or discredit the identifying witness, or to rebut a charge, imputation or inference of falsity.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Woods v. State
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.