Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 521 A.2d 278 - State v. Hussey

State v. Hussey’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 2025

2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

8019871990200020102020decided

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 State v. Pomerleau · State v. Greene · State v. Caouette · State v. Ranger · State v. Ranger

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

  1. “(1)the proposed witness is incapable of communicating concerning the matter so as to be understood by the judge and jury either directly or through interpretation by one who can understand the proposed witness, (2) the proposed witness is incapable of understanding the duty of a witness to tell the truth, (3) the proposed witness lacked any reasonable ability to perceive the matter or (4) the proposed witness lacks any reasonable ability to remember the matter.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) General Rule of Competency. Every person is competent to be a witness except as otherwise provided in these rules. (b) Disqualification of Witness. A person is disqualified to be a witness if the court finds that (1) the proposed witness is incapable of expressing himself concerning the matter so as to be understood by the judge and jury either directly or through interpretation by one who can understand him, (2) the proposed witness is incapable of understanding the duty of a witness to tell the truth, (3) the proposed witness lacked any reasonable ability to perceive the matter or (4) the • proposed witness lacks any reasonable ability to remember the matter....”
    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.