Whitfield v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
1 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently May 2008
1 district · 15 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 Gregory v. United States · Reavis v. Antinore · Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Inc. v. Blankenship · Kerr v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California · Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Federal Maritime Commission
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(A) General Provision: The requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Demby 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.