Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 636 P2D 352 - Campbell v. State

Campbell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
2
states following
January 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably McGregor v. State (1994), State v. Turrentine (1986)

2 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

1701981199020002010decided

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 Sandstrom v. Montana · Mullaney v. Wilbur · Dusky v. United States · Pate v. Robinson · Green v. State

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

  1. “"The purpose of the competency trial is to determine whether a defendant has 'sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding, and whether he has a rational, as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him.' Dusky v. Unmaited States, 862 U.S. 402 , 80 S.Ct. 788 , 4 L.Ed.2d 824 (1960)" (Emphasis added.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The trial court should allow cross-examination into matters which tend to explain, contradict, or discredit any testimony given by a witness or which tests his accuracy, memory, veracity or credibility.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “matters affecting the credibility of the witness.”
    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.