Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 881 P.2d 913 - State v. Cook

State v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
April 2002
most recently cited

9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Indelicato v. United States · Bullock v. Oppenheim, Appel, Dixon & Co. · Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania v. Ben Cooper, Inc. · Clarke v. West Virginia Board of Regents · State v. Eldredge

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

  1. “the trial court must make an in-depth evaluation of the proposed testimony as required by subsection 76-5-411(1). This inquiry may require consideration of some matters not specifically mentioned in the statute. For example, to determine the reliability of the statement, a court should consider how soon after the event it was given, whether the statement was spontaneous, the questions asked to elicit it, the number of times the statement was repeated or rehearsed, and whether the statement is reproduced verbatim in court, viz., tape recording, video tape, or otherwise. The trial court should then enter findings and conclusions regarding each of the factors listed in the statute to explain its reasons for admitting or excluding the testimony.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Rule 23B of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure allows this court to remand, on proper motion made by a party to the appeal or the court’s own motion, for the purpose of 'entering findings of fact relevant to a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.' ’’ Cook, 881 P.2d at 915 n. 3 (citation omitted).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “the supreme court's language in Eldredge clearly establishes that after Nelson, a trial court's failure to enter written findings and conclusions under section 76-5-411 is plain error.”
    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.