State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

34 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]e do not find that the denial of a severance resulted jn any prejudice to defendant at trial. Evidence relating to both offenses would have been admissible in separate trials to show a common scheme or plan under V.R.E. 404(b). As previously discussed, the offenses revealed a common objective, plan and method. Therefore, as we explained in Johnson , “the common features of defendant’s conduct, the settings, and the victims', would have permitted admission of the evidence under 404(b).” We note further that joinder did not inhibit defendant from testifying with regard to either of the charged offenses.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Labounty · State v. Willis

2. “(1) are of the same or similar character, even if not part of a single scheme or plan; or (2) are based on the same conduct or on a series of acts connected together or constituting parts of a single scheme or plan.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Willis

3. “defendant was accused of taking advantage of his position as camp counselor to sexually exploit young, male, mentally handicapped campers during a two-week camp session held in one location.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Willis