Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2000 UT 59 - State v. Nelson-Waggoner

State v. Nelson-Waggoner’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
3
states following
February 2020
most recently cited

54 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently February 2020 · most notably State v. Killpack (2008), State v. Lucero (2014)

54 state decisions

310200020102020decided

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 Gomez v. Dade County School Board · Lovely v. United States · Western Telepage, Inc. v. City of Tacoma · United States v. Drew · State v. Shickles

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

  1. “Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”
    17 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “'[wle review the record to determine whether the admission of other bad acts evidence was 'serupulously examined' by the trial judge 'in the proper exercise of that discretion.”
    17 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “the trial court must ... determine whether the bad acts evidence is being offered for a proper, noncharacter purpose, such as one of those specifically listed in rule 404(b).”
    11 later decisions 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.