Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 802 N.E.2d 486 - Bryant v. State

Bryant v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
5
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably State v. Vonte Skinner (071764) (2014), Hape v. State (2009)

29 state decisions

220200420102020decided

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 Joyner v. State · Kubsch v. State · Kien v. State · Willey v. State · Powell 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(2) by the child's custodial parent, guardian, custodian, or guardian ad li-tem if: (A) that person knowingly and voluntarily waives the right; (B) that person has no interest adverse to the child; (C) meaningful consultation has occurred between that person and the child; and (D) the child knowingly and voluntarily joins with the waiver.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Inasmuch as [the victim’s] body was recovered from the trunk of her car, and Bryant had driven that vehicle for several days visiting friends and telling them that he was the owner, the reference in the exhibits to finding a body in the trunk of “my car” made it more probable that Bryant killed [the victim] and placed her body in the trunk. Thus, such evidence was relevant, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the exhibits on this basis.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “an offer of proof should identify not only anticipated testimony, but also the grounds on which the evidence is believed to be admissible”); Curley v. State, 777 N.E.2d 58, 61 (Ind.Ct.App.2002) (”
    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.