Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 18 Va. App. 293 - Wilkins v. Commonwealth

18 Va. App. 293 - Wilkins v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
1
states following
March 2015
most recently cited

42 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently March 2015 · most notably 23 Va. App. 394 - Shears v. Commonwealth (1996), 57 Va. App. 495 - Ervin v. Commonwealth (2011)

42 state decisions

300199420002010decided

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 4 Va. App. 438 - Martin v. Commonwealth · Kirkpatrick v. Commonwealth · Spencer v. Commonwealth · Hamilton v. Texas · 1 Va. App. 241 - Sutphin v. Commonwealth

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

  1. “[e]vidence that tends to establish a fact at issue is relevant and material and, therefore, admissible, if its probative value is not outweighed by any prejudicial effect. Despite the prejudice “inherent” in proof that the accused has committed other crimes, this rule is no different when such evidence is offered to establish knowledge or intent, provided there exists a “relation or connection” between the prior misconduct and the facts in issue which sufficiently establishes relevancy and materiality.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “However, the law will not permit one accused of a crime to go unpunished simply because the Commonwealth cannot prove his guilt without bringing in some evidence which tends to show that he has committed other crimes. Thus, the general rule ... must sometimes yield to society’s interest in the truth-finding process, and numerous exceptions allow evidence of prior misconduct whenever the legitimate probative value outweighs the incidental prejudice to the accused.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Evidence that tends to establish a fact at issue is relevant and material and, therefore, admissible, if its probative value is not outweighed by any prejudicial effect.... Once evidence is determined to be relevant and material, "[t]he responsibility for balancing ... probative value and prejudice rests in the sound discretion of the trial court," and its decision "will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of a clear abuse."”
    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.