Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2010 UTAPP 209 - State v. Hildreth

State v. Hildreth’s Empirical Analysis

2010

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
June 2022
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Drew · State v. Shickles · State v. Fedorowicz · State v. Nelson-Waggoner · State v. Mead

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

  1. “the cumulative prior bad acts evidence may have the tendency to suggest a verdict on an improper, emotional basis”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The striking similarities in each incident, coupled with the proximity in time of the offenses, supplied a sufficient basis for the trial court to conclude that the crimes were alleged to have been part of a common scheme or plan ....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “To be classified as a common plan or scheme it is not necessary for the crimes to have been perpetrated in an absolutely identical manner, so long as the court perceives a visual connection between the crimes.”
    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.