Carroll v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
87 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably McDuff v. State (1997), State v. Vogleson (2002)
87 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 Delaware v. Van Arsdall · Davis v. Alaska · Pointer v. Texas · California v. Green · Douglas v. Alabama
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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... Evidence to show bias or interest of a witness in a cause covers a wide range and the field of external circumstances from which probable bias or interest may be inferred is infinite. The rule encompasses all facts and circumstances, which when tested by human experience, tend to show that a witness may shade his testimony for the purpose of helping to establish one side of the cause only.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him ....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[t]he scope of appropriate cross-examination is necessarily broad. A defendant is entitled to pursue all avenues of cross-examination reasonably calculated to expose a motive, bias or interest for the witness to testify .... [t]his broad scope [of appropriate cross-examination] necessarily includes cross-examination concerning criminal charges pending against a witness and over which those in need of the witness' testimony might be empowered to exercise control. [3]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Carpenter v. State · Hoyos v. State
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.