State v. Uyesugi’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably State v. Gonsalves (2005), State v. Schnabel. (2012)
1 federal appellate · 26 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 Leland v. Oregon · 32 Cal. 3d 307 - People v. Wickersham · Davis v. United States · 12 Cal. 4th 186 - People v. Barton · Pele Defense Fund v. Paty
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the need for the evidence, the efficacy of alternative proof, and the degree to which the evidence will probably rouse the jury to overmastering hostility.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. McQueen · State v. Palisbo“Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Alston · State v. Mersberg“the purpose of the testimony, whether the [witnesses] expressed their opinions or characterizations of the crime and the effect of the crime on [them], the strength and weakness of the evidence against the defendant, whether the failure to object to such testimony was the result of trial strategy or ineffective assistance of counsel, and whether and how the testimony was woven into the case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Riveira
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.