Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 686 S.W.2d 127 - Sledge v. State

Sledge v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 2016

21 state decisions

1201984199020002010decided

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 Carlsen v. State · Myre v. State · Frison v. State · Lyons v. State · Roney 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “`[bolstering' occurs when one item of evidence is improperly used by a party to add credence or weight to some earlier unimpeached piece of evidence offered by the same party.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. Cohn v. State · Johnson v. State
  2. “It is the rule that while a witness who has identified her assailant at the trial may testify that she also identified him while he was in custody of the police, others may not bolster her unimpeached testimony by corroborating the fact that she did identify him. [Emphasis ours.] * * * * * * Once identification testimony of that complainant is impeached, however, third party corroboration may become admissible as a method of rehabilitating the witness. Conceptually, corroboration following impeachment is not to be considered “bolstering.” Hence, third party testimony as to an extrajudicial identification will be admitted where it serves to rehabilitate a complainant’s identification testimony that has been subjected to impeachment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Davis 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.