Cox v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently May 2023 · most notably 954 So. 2d 968 - Ross v. State (2007), State v. Alan S. Johnson (2023)
29 state decisions
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 California v. Trombetta · Arizona v. Youngblood · Pennsylvania v. Ritchie · 503 So. 2d 803 - Wetz v. State · 137 Ill. 2d 65 - People v. Bean
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.
“First, it must be determined whether the evidence would have played a significant role in the defendant's case. To play a significant role, the exculpatory nature and value of the evidence must have been apparent before the evidence was lost.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“An in camera review by the court of the medical records to determine if the evidence is material, relevant and exculpatory would be appropriate. . . . If the circuit court finds that the records are admissible, the records should be redacted as much as possible to show only the evidence which is relevant and exculpatory.”
2 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.