Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 782 P2D 290 - Nelson v. State

Nelson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
4
states following
September 2020
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently September 2020

12 state decisions

6019891990200020102020decided

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 Love v. State · State v. Moran · United States v. Azure · Marks v. State · State v. Clements

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

  1. “effectively informed the jury that, in his expert opinion, [they] were telling the truth and had been abused by Nelson”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “We have recognized a special danger when an expert is allowed to apply a novel psychological profile to identify a person as a member of a certain group or class in order to prove that the person [has] testified truthfully or acted unlawfully. ' Because the expert in effect assumes the role of human polygraph in such cases, we have ... required] the proponent of [such] evidence to demonstrate that the psychological profile involved in the case has been generally accepted as valid and that the expert’s testimony concerning the profile has particularized relevance to issues actually in dispute. We have never authorized expert testimony seeking to establish that a person is a member of a particular class or group, i.e., battered women or sexually abused children, by showing that [the person] exhibit[s] behavioral characteristics common to that group.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Rodriguez and Anderson , read together, permit expert testimony that responds to a defense claim that a complaining witness’ conduct is inconsistent with being sexually abused by showing that similar conduct is exhibited by those who are sexually abused. These decisions do not permit testimony offered to prove that the complaining witness is sexually abused by showing that the complaining witness exhibits behavior similar to that exhibited by sexually abused children.”
    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.