Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 158 W. Va. 541 - State v. Ramey

158 W. Va. 541 - State v. Ramey’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
March 2009
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently March 2009

21 state decisions

1301975198019902000decided

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 Spencer v. State of Texas a Bell · 157 W. Va. 640 - State v. Thomas · Luck v. United States · 156 W. Va. 409 - State v. McArdle · 130 W. Va. 74 - State v. Taylor

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

  1. ““The exceptions permitting evidence of collateral crimes and charges to be admissible against an accused are recognized as follows: the evidence is admissible if it tends to establish (1) motive; (2) intent; (3) the absence of mistake or accident; (4) a common scheme or plan embracing the commission of two or more crimes so related to each other that proof of one tends to establish the others; and (5) the identity of the person charged with the commission of the crime on trial.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “It is the policy of the law that matters which are collateral to material issues of a criminal trial shall not obfuscate the main issues of the case or be introduced for the purpose of prejudicing the defendant by making him respond to a separate criminal charge; accordingly, absent a proper foundation for the introduction of an otherwise collateral matter, the court, in the exercise of sound discretion, should refuse such proffer.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““The character of the accused may also furnish the State with the opportunity to employ other criminal charges, offenses and convictions involving the defendant against him. Where the accused takes the stand or produces witnesses who testify as to his previous good character in defense of the charge against him, he or they may be cross-examined on otherwise unconnected and irrelevant matters to demonstrate his bad character.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.