State v. Baltimore’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

33 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““There are two components to relevant evidence: materiality and probative value. Materiality looks to the relation between the propositions for which the evidence is offered and the issues in the case. If the evidence is offered to help prove a proposition which is not a matter in issue, the evidence is immaterial. What is ‘in issue,’ that is, within the range of the litigated controversy, is determined mainly by the pleadings, read in the light of the rules of pleading and controlled by the substantive law____ “The second aspect of relevance is probative value, the tendency of evidence to establish the proposition that it is offered to prove____””

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 3 Neb. Ct. App. 474 - In Re Interest of McCauley H. · State v. Bell

2. ““Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.” Neb. Evid. R. 401, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-401 (Reissue 1989). Neb. Evid. R. 402 permits the admission of relevant evidence only. State v. Robertson, 219 Neb. 782 , 366 N.W.2d 429 (1985). To be relevant, evidence must be rationally related to an issue by a likelihood, not a mere possibility, of proving or disproving an issue to be decided. State v. Baltimore, 236 Neb. 736 , 463 N.W.2d 808 (1990); State v. Robertson, supra. “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.” Neb. Evid. R. 403, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-403 (Reissue 1989). ... In the context of Neb. Evid. R. 403, “unfair prejudice” means an undue tendency to suggest a decision on an improper basis.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Reynolds

3. “Probative value is a relative concept; the probative value of a piece of evidence involves a measurement of the degree to which the evidence persuades the trier of fact that the particular fact exists and the distance of the particular fact from the ultimate issues of the case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 4 Neb. Ct. App. 489 - State v. Wilson