Farris v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently March 2010
14 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 O'BRYAN v. State · Pless v. State · Robinson v. State · Smith v. State · Acker 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is a well settled rule in this State the prosecution may not bolster or support its own witnesses unless they have been impeached on cross-examination. An un-impeached witness may not be bolstered simply because his or her testimony may be disbelieved; it is only when a witness is placed in a position of having testified differently from earlier testimony that a party will be permitted to bolster its own case. The bolstering testimony must be related to the impeachment to be admissible.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Yount v. State“The rehabilitating facts must meet a particular method of impeachment with relative directness. The wall, attacked at one point, may not be fortified at another and distinct point.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Duckett v. State
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.