Jones v. Wahlic’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 2018
7 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 McDaniel v. Lovelace · Kuzuf v. Gebhardt · Wren v. St. Louis Public Service Company · Norwood Ex Rel. Norwood v. Lazarus · State Ex Rel. Home Service Oil Company v. Hess
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Among the factors to be considered [in determining whether an excited utterance exists] are [1] the time between the startling event and the declaration, [2] whether the declaration is in response to a question, [3] whether the declaration is self-serving, and [4] the declarant’s physical and mental condition at the time of the declaration. While no one factor necessarily results in automatic exclusion, all should be considered in determining whether the declaration was the result of reflective thought.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[r]easonable minds may differ as to whether [Appellant] met his burden in showing the statement was an excited utterance; therefore, no manifest abuse of the trial court's discretion has been demonstrated.”
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.