Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 885 SW2D 349 - State v. Caulfield

State v. Caulfield’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
June 2000
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Sladek · State v. Nelson · State v. Kuzma · State v. Ek · State v. Seemiller

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

  1. “To trigger the application of the corroboration rule, the victim’s testimony must be “so contradictory or in conflict with physical facts, surrounding circumstances, and common experience as to be unconvincing.” [Citation omitted.] The corroboration rule does not apply, however, where the inconsistency or even contradiction bears on a proof not essential to the case.”
    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.