State v. El'Ayache’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably State v. Richie (1998), State v. Okumura (1995)
32 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 Chambers v. Mississippi · California v. Green · Cooper v. State of California · Mancusi v. Stubbs · S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc. v. Johnson
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The right to confront and to cross-examine is not absolute and may, in appropriate cases, bow to accommodate other legitimate interests in the criminal trial process. Indubitably, one of the legitimate interests in the criminal trial process is the right of defense counsel to make an appropriate judgment on the trial tactics and procedure to be employed in defense of his client based upon his knowledge of the facts and law of the case; another is the expeditious manner in which the criminal trial is conducted. The decision whether to call a witness or not in a criminal trial is normally a matter within the judgment of counsel and, accordingly, will rarely be second-guessed by judicial hindsight.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Wilson · State v. Wilson“Id. The court noted that had defense counsel been successful in raising a reasonable doubt about whether the value of the items stolen exceeded $200, the defendant would have been convicted of a misdemeanor instead of a felony. Id. III. In Murray, however, the Hawai`i Supreme Court held that when a stipulation regarding prior convictions is used to prove an element of a charged offense,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. FRUSTAGLI“in admitting the [witness] stipulations into evidence without first determining whether defendant had knowingly and voluntarily waived her constitutional right to confront and cross-examine the witnesses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. FRUSTAGLI
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.