163 W. Va. 681 - State v. Green’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 74 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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'[tlhe fact that a woman consented to sexual intercourse on one occasion is not substantial evidence that she consented on another ...' We do not agree that her sexual history with other men is never relevant and never admissible. A woman's reputation for unchastity has no probative value because it is neither relevant to her credibility as a witness nor does it prove she consented in any particular instance. But there may be unusual cases where the probative value is precisely demonstrated, and outweighs the prejudicial effect of the testimony, such as [where] ... the defendant alleges the prosecutrix actually consented to an act of U prostitution ...'. A statutory prohibition so broad that it forecloses cross-examination even. in [such instances], denies a defendant his right to effectively confront his accuser. We would suggest that evidence of consensual sexual activities with others, not specifically and directly related to the act of which a victim complains, should never be admissible; and that such evidence, that is specifically, directly related to the act for which a defendant stands charged, must be of a quality that its admission is necessary to prevent manifest injustice and therefore outweigh the State's interest in protecting persons who have been sexually abused, from attempts at besmirchment of their character by ones who have trespassed upon their bodies.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Williams v. State