Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 604 A.2d 1249 - State v. Gomes

State v. Gomes’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
2
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

41 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Powers v. State (1999), State v. Marini (1994)

41 state decisions

220199220002010decided

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. Wade · Neil v. Biggers · Giglio v. United States · Manson v. Brathwaite · Gilbert v. California

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

  1. ““The factors to be considered when determining if an identification is independently reliable include the opportunity of the witness to view the criminal, the witness’s degree of attention, the accuracy of his prior description of the criminal, the level of certainty demonstrated at the confrontation, and the time between the crime and the confrontation.” Mastracchio, 612 A.2d at 705 (quoting State v. Gomes, 604 A.2d 1249, 1253 (R.I.1992)).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““[Exclusion] of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or waste of time. — Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury * *”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “When reviewing the instructions of a trial justice, we must examine the instructions in their entirety in order to determine the manner in which a jury of ordinary intelligent lay persons would have understood the instructions as a whole.”
    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.