Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 527 A.2d 276 - Powell v. State

Powell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
10
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably State v. Rimmasch (1989), State v. Ali (1995)

29 state decisions — followed in 10 states

12019871990200020102020decided

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 United States v. Binder · Wainwright v. State · Allison v. State · Wheat v. State · Fields v. United States

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

  1. “ninety-nine percent of the alleged victims involved in sexual abuse treatment programs in which she was also involved 'have told the truth.' " ( Id . at p. 278 ; Brooks , supra , 64 M.J. at p. 329 .) The court in Powell reasoned that the testimony "deprived [the defendant] of his right to have his fate determined by a jury making the credibility determinations, so clearly crucial in these cases, without guidance from an expert, in stark mathematical terms, bolstering the credibility of the complainant and thereby impugning his credibility. ( Powell , at pp. 279-280 ; see Wheat v. State (Del. 1987) 527 A.2d 269 , 274-275 [in providing "statistical evaluation of complainant's present veracity,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “RULE 702. TESTIMONY BY EXPERTS. If scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training or education may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““plain,” i.e. so prejudicial to substantial rights as to jeopardize the fairness and integrity of the trial process. The error must be material, apparent on the face of the record, fundamental in its character, and must clearly deprive an accused of a substantial right or show manifest injustice.”
    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.