Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 63 P.3d 765 - State v. CJ

State v. CJ’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
4
states following
November 2017
most recently cited

54 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Ohio v. Roberts · California v. Green · Dutton v. Evans · Pennsylvania v. Ritchie · Idaho v. Wright

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

  1. “to best advance the legislative purpose.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “decision is manifestly unreasonable or is based on untenable reasons or grounds.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"(1) [W]hether there is an apparent motive to lie; (2) the general character of the declarant; (3) whether more than one person heard the statements; (4) whether the statements were made spontaneously; and (5) the timing of the declaration and the relationship between the declarant and the witness[;] ... [(6)] the statement contains no express assertion about past fact[;] [(7)] cross examination could not show the declarant's lack of knowledge[;] [(8)] the possibility of the declarant's faulty recollection is remote[;] and [(9)]the circumstances surrounding the statement (in that case spontaneous and against interest) are such that there is no reason to suppose the declarant misrepresented defendant's involvement."”
    2 later decisions 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.