State v. Carter’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

42 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]his court’s rule 404(2) analysis considers whether the (1) evidence was relevant for some purpose other than to prove the character of a person to show that he or she acted in conformity therewith, (2) probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by its potential for unfair prejudice, and (3) trial court, if requested, instructed the jury to consider the evidence only for the limited purpose for which it was admitted.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Sanchez · 8 Neb. Ct. App. 740 - State v. Egger

2. “The plain language of [Neb. Evid. R.] 901 is directory rather than mandatory. . . . We áre also guided in our application of rule 901 by federal court decisions explaining Fed. R. Evid. 901, which is effectively identical to Nebraska’s rule 901 and upon which it was based. ... It has been said that federal rule 901 “does not erect a particularly high hurdle.” . . . “[T]he proponent of the evidence is not required ‘to rule out all possibilities inconsistent with authenticity, or to prove beyond any doubt that the evidence is what it purports to be.’ ”... The authentication requirement does not demand that the proponent of a piece of evidence conclusively demonstrate the genuineness of his or her article, but only that he or she make a showing “‘sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims.’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jacobson