607 So. 2d 937 - State v. Hicks’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently September 2016
20 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Jackson v. Denno · Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n · Kissinger v. Halperin · New York v. Ferber
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he mere assertion that the hearsay rule does not apply, if the statement is offered only for the fact that it was stated and not as proof of the fact in the statement, is not a correct statement of the law. Any testimony could be admitted under this reasoning by the fiction that the testimony is elicited “for the mere fact it was stated’-’ rather than for its truth. There must be some purpose in admitting the testimony other than to show the truth of the matter.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the present trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]hen existing mental, emotional, or physical condition.”
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.