Somee v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently December 2025 · most notably Chavez v. State (2009), Cortes v. State (2011)
30 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Terry v. Ohio · Wong Sun v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Florida v. Bostick
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that he was a member of the Hor-ney Boyz gang and that officers had previously found him in possession of weapons. 12 See id. at 157 . Somee objected under a rule similar to rule 404(b) on the ground that the evidence was impermissible character evidence. See id. at 157, 160 . The trial court allowed the evidence of Somee's gang affiliation to be introduced and the jury convicted him. See id. On appeal, Somee claimed that the police officers' testimony about his gang affiliation was improper character evidence that should have been admitted only with a contemporaneous limiting instruction, as required by Nevada precedent regarding evidence of prior bad acts. See id. at 160 . After reversing and remanding for a new trial on other grounds, the Nevada Supreme Court indicated that the evidence of Somee's gang affiliation "was not character evidence”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“review[s] the district court's findings of historical fact for clear error [and] the legal consequences of those factual findings de novo.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Cantsee“[T]his court has the discretion to review constitutional or plain error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. LaChance 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.