204 W. Va. 504 - State v. Zacks’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Where an offer of evidence is made under Rule 404(b) of the West Virginia Rules of Evidence, the trial court, pursuant to Rule 104(a) of the West Virginia Rules of Evidence, is to determine its admissibility. Before admitting the evidence, the trial court should conduct an in camera hearing as stated in State v. Dolin, 176 W.Va. 688 , 347 S.E.2d 208 (1986). After hearing the evidence and arguments of counsel, the trial court must be satisfied by a preponderance of the evidence that the acts or conduct occurred and that the defendant committed the acts. If the trial court does not find by a preponderance of the evidence that the acts or conduct was committed or that the defendant was the actor, the evidence should be excluded under Rule 404(b). If a sufficient showing has been made, the trial court must then determine the relevancy of the evidence under Rules 401 and 402 of the West Virginia Rules of Evidence and conduct the balancing required under Rule 403 of the West Virginia Rules of Evidence. If the trial court is then satisfied that the Rule 404(b) evidence is admissible, it should instruct the jury on the limited purpose for which such evidence has been admitted. A limiting instruction should be given at the time the evidence is offered, and we recommend that it be repeated in the trial court’s general charge to the jury at the conclusion of the evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 214 W. Va. 342 - State v. Parsons

2. “breaking and entering” contemplates the criminal complaint in Case No. ll-F-12, which charged the petitioner with a violation of West Virginia Code § 61 — 3— 12. This statute provides, in part: If any person shall, at any time, break and enter ..., or shall enter without breaking, any ... storehouse ... or any ... building ... with intent to commit a felony or any larceny, he or she shall be deemed guilty of a felony.... W.Va.Code § 61-3-12. Not only does the statute itself use the words”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 233 W. Va. 212 - SER Bryan D. Thompson v. Hon. Joseph C. Pomponio, Judge

3. ““A prudent prosecutor limits himself to what is needed to prove the charge in the indictment. In the process of proving the charge, other offenses may sometimes come to light incidentally, but when the prosecution devotes excessive trial time to this type of ‘background’ material, it runs the risk of trespassing into the impermissible area and jeopardizing any resulting conviction.” United States v. Mastrototaro, 455 F.2d 802, 804 (4th Cir.1972).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 214 W. Va. 342 - State v. Parsons