Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 767 A2D 655 - State v. Medina

State v. Medina’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
December 2011
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Pointer v. Texas · Parker v. Randolph · United States v. Oliver · State v. Hannagan · State v. Burke

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ ‘The rationale for the excited utterance or spontaneous exclamation exception is that a startling event may produce an effect that temporarily stills the declar-ant’s capacity of reflection and produces statements free of conscious fabrication.’ * * * ‘The guarantee of trustworthiness [for the excited utterance exception] is assured as long as the declarant made the statement as an “instinctive outpouring” or an “effusion.” ’ * * * ‘[A] statement made in response to a traumatic or startling event is a spontaneous utterance so long as it was made while the declarant “was still laboring under the stress of [the] * * * experience.” ’ ” Id.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.