Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 721 NE2D 213 - Smith v. State

Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

34 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Drollinger v. State · Thompson v. State · Griffin 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “courts look to several factors, including the strength of the prosecution's case, the importance of the witness' testimony, whether the testimony was corroborated, the cross-examination that did occur, and whether the witness' testimony was repetitive.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Witnesses may not testify to opinions concerning intent, guilt, or innocence in a criminal case; the truth or falsity of allegations; whether a witness has testified truthfully; or legal conclusions.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[b]ecause [the witness]'s testimony was essential to the State's case . . . we cannot conclude that this restriction on exploring [the witness]'s bias was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt”
    2 later decisions 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.