State v. Watts’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 1992
14 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 Chapman v. State of California · Pointer v. Texas · Harrington v. California · Dutton v. Evans · Love 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides that one accused in a criminal prosecution shall enjoy the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him.... The Constitution of South Dakota assures him the same right in a different language .... While the hearsay rule and the confrontation clause are designed to protect similar values it does not follow that the right to be confronted demands that no hearsay evidence can ever be introduced.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Orelup
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.