2000 UT App 238 - State v. Webster’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently June 2020
18 state decisions
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 Texas v. Louisiana · Arkansas Public Service Commission v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. · Gomez v. Dade County School Board · United States Steel Corporation v. United States Environmental Protection Agency · Holsey v. Director of Classification for Division of Corrections
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident. In other words, evidence offered under this rule is admissible if it is relevant for a non-character purpose and meets the requirements of Rules 402 and 403.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Admission of evidence under [rjule 404(b) is reviewed for abuse of discretion. However, admission of prior crimes evidence itself must be scrupulously examined by trial judges in the proper exercise of that discretion. In other words, failure of a trial court to undertake a scrupulous examination in connection with the admission 'of prior bad act evidence constitutes an abuse of discretion.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Since the advisory committee generally sought to achieve uniformity between Utah's rules of evidence and the federal rules of evidence, this court looks to the interpretations of the federal rules by the federal courts to aid in interpreting the Utah rules.”
2 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.