Goodner v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently October 2011 · most notably Williams v. State (1999), Lambert v. State (2001)
33 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Bagley · Giglio v. United States · Napue v. People of the State of Illinois
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he record must disclose substantial evidence of probative value that supports the trial court's decision. We do not reweigh the evidence and we consider conflicting evidence most favorably to the trial court's ruling.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Finger v. State · McIntosh v. State“Members of the bar and the trial bench should remember their obligation to report such misconduct to the appropriate authorities.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(d) Statements Which are Not Hearsay. A statement is not hearsay if: (1) Prior statement by witness. The de-clarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement, and the statement is (A) inconsistent with the declarant's testimony and was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing or other proceeding, or in a deposition; or (B) consistent with the de-clarant's testimony, offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive, and made before the motive to fabricate arose; or (C) one of identification of a person made shortly after perceiving the person;. ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ringham 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.