652 So. 2d 1069 - State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently December 2018
3 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 Chapman v. State of California · Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Frye v. United States · Bulova Watch Co. v. United States · 628 So. 2d 1116 - State v. Foret
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“of CSAAS were intended for treatment purposes once instances of sexual abuse had been established, not for the purpose of determining whether the abuse had occurred. Despite this, CSAAS testimony was consistently used by prosecutors to bolster the credibility of the victim that abuse had occurred. The Court also noted the lack of general acceptability of CSAAS factors, the impossibility to”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“associated with CSAAS factors. The Court also addressed the actual”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the reliability of these factors, and the relatively high”
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.