Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 748 P2D 34 - Croney v. State

Croney v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 2024

1 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

5019871990200020102020decided

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 United States v. Beahm · United States v. Cavender · Harrall v. State · Rushing v. State · Campbell 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"Evidence of a conviction under this section is not admissible if a period of more than ten (10) years has elapsed since the date of the conviction or of the release of the witness from the confinement imposed for that conviction, whichever is later, unless the court determines, in the interests of justice, that the probative value of the conviction supported by specific facts and circumstances substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect...."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “sufficient advance written notice of intent to use such evidence to provide the adverse party with a fair opportunity to contest the use of such evidence . . . unless, during the ten-year period, the witness has been convicted of a subsequent crime which is a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude or a felony.”
    1 later decision 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.