Kubsch v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
59
cited by 59 later decisions
1
states following
January 2019
most recently cited
5 federal appellate · 54 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Chapman v. State of California · Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Doyle v. Ohio · Washington v. Texas
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“(a) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness's testimony or the determination of a fact in issue.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage““Perception” has been defined as “[t]he process, act, or faculty of perceiving .... [i]nsight, intuition, or knowledge gained by perceiving.” The Amer ican Heritage College Dictionary 1014 (3d ed. 1993). In turn, “perceive” has been defined as “[t]o become aware of directly through any of the senses, esp. sight or hearing.” Id. at 1013.”
4 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.