Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 855 SW2D 700 - Delk v. State

Delk v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

81
cited by 81 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
February 2017
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 79 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 81 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2017 · most notably Hughes v. State (1994), Barley v. State (1995)

1 federal appellate · 79 state decisions

350199320002010decided

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 Terry v. Ohio · Simmons v. United States · Manson v. Brathwaite · Lockett v. Ohio · Eddings v. Oklahoma

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

  1. “creates a false impression of law abiding behavior, he `opens the door' on his otherwise irrelevant past criminal history and opposing counsel may expose the falsehood.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) General Rule. For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from the witness or established by public record but only if the crime was a felony or involved moral turpitude, regardless of punishment, and the court determines that the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to a party.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “• the witness’s opportunity to view the criminal when the crime occurred; • the witness’s degree of attention; • the accuracy of the witness’s prior description of the criminal; • the witness’s level of certainty demonstrated at the confrontation; and • the length of time between the crime and the confrontation.”
    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.