Scott v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1956
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently March 1995
20 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 People v. Lucas · State v. Fitch · 123 Cal. App. 233 - People v. De Voe · 63 Cal. App. 662 - People v. Ortiz · State v. Plunkett
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[Cjonfining our conclusion to the facts of this case in which competency of the complaining witness was firmly established . . . the corroborating evidence [of identification] . . . the lack of any inherent incredibility in the testimony, the entire lack of any elements of spite, vengeance, vindictiveness or other base motives, coupled with the full instructions given by the court as to the credibility of witnesses and the necessity of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, we are satisfied that there was no error in the refusal to give the cautionary instructions. See annotation to, People v. Lucas, 16 Cal. 2d 178 , 105 P.2d 102 , appearing at 130 A.L.R. 1489 , 1491.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. May 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.