Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 818 SW2D 285 - State v. Nelson

State v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

72
cited by 72 later decisions
1
states following
November 2016
most recently cited

71 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently November 2016 · most notably State v. Wright (1996), State v. Martin (1993)

71 state decisions

630199120002010decided

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 State v. Harris · State v. Newberry · State v. Burton · State v. Baldwin · State v. Evans

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

  1. “is limited to inconsistencies in the victim's statements....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “As the Missouri Supreme Court stated in 1930, there seems to be no logical basis for a separate rule, even a restricted one, which relates solely to the review of the testimony of a victim of a sexual offense. The standards for reviewing the testimony of any witness in a criminal case should be sufficient to assess the testimony of a victim of a sexual offense. Missouri courts of appeals have questioned the continued existence of this exception.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]he rule in this state is that a conviction in cases of rape may be had upon the uncorroborated evidence of the prosecutrix. It is only in those cases where the evidence of the prosecutrix is of a contradictory nature or, when applied to the admitted facts in the case, her testimony is not convincing and leaves the mind of the court clouded with doubt, that she must be corroborated or a judgment cannot be sustained.”
    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.