709 So. 2d 992 - State v. Haley’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
November 2002
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Myles · State v. Henderson · 544 So. 2d 461 - State v. Holland · 640 So. 2d 561 - State v. Moore · 561 So. 2d 76 - Buckbee v. United Gas Pipe Line Co. Inc.
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... As McCormick explains, a present sense impression is "confined to `describing or explaining'" an event or condition perceived by the speaker. McCormick on Evidence Sec. 298. The critical factor is whether the statement was made while the individual was "perceiving" the event or "immediately thereafter." L.C.E. art. 803(1); McCormick on Evidence Sec. 298. The statement may follow "immediately" after perceiving an event, allowing only for "the time needed for translating observation into speech." McCormick on Evidence Sec. 298.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Jones“a statement describing or explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or condition, or immediately thereafter.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Jones
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.