McCarthy v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
June 2001
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Lagenour v. State · Springer v. United States · 181 Ind. App. 5 - Haeger v. State · Bluck v. State · Thornton 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where the record reflects a curtailment of a requested line of bias cross-examination in limine, so that the jury is unable properly to perform its fact-finding function in inferring bias from the testimony as a whole, we will assess crofes-examination errors by a per se error standard.... If, however, the trial court has permitted some cross-examination so that the jury has sufficient information from which to infer bias (should it so choose), this court will evaluate error by application of the harmless constitutional error test....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Tucker 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.