State v. Cuni’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[O]nly in situations where the relevance and probative worth of prior sexual experience are clear and substantial should the Rape Shield Law bend to the confrontation rights of the defendant.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 360 N.J. Super. 346 - State v. Buscham · 385 N.J. Super. 72 - State v. REB

2. “[w]henever the confrontation rights of a defendant are considered in connection with the State’s interest in excluding evidence under the Rape Shield Law, courts must engage in a two-step analysis: first, “whether the evidence was relevant to the defense[,]” and second, “[i]f the evidence is relevant ... whether its probative value outweighs its prejudicial effect.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Stewart v. State

3. “relevant and that the probative value of the evidence offered is not outweighed by its collateral nature or by the probability that its admission will create undue prejudice, confusion of the issues, or unwarranted invasion of privacy of the victim,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Garron