State v. Barriner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

45 state decisions

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

1. “Evidence must be both logically and legally relevant in order to be admissible. Evidence is logically relevant if it tends to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence, or if it tends to corroborate evidence which itself is relevant and bears on the principal issue of the case. Evidence is legally relevant if its probative value outweighs its costs — prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, waste of time or cu-mulativeness.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. McWilliams · State v. Polson

2. “[w]hen the evidence is merely that another person had opportunity or motive to commit the offense, or the evidence is otherwise disconnected or remote and there is no evidence that the other person committed an act directly connected to the offense, the minimal probative value of the evidence is outweighed by its tendency to confuse or misdirect the jury.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Rieser · State v. Sanders

3. “Evidence is legally relevant if its probative value outweighs its costs-prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, waste of time or cumulativeness.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. McWilliams · Esters v. State