Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 269 Ga. 506 - Wall v. State

Wall v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

165
cited by 165 later decisions
4
states following
June 2022
most recently cited

165 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 165 later decisions — most recently June 2022 · most notably Klauenberg v. State (1999), Suggs v. State (2000)

165 state decisions

10101998200020102020decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · Gunter v. State · Maxwell v. State · Carr v. State · 220 Ga. App. 303 - Parker v. State

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

  1. “[E]vidence of the defendant’s prior acts toward the victim, be it a prior assault, a quarrel, or a threat, is admissible when the defendant is accused of a criminal act against the victim, as the prior acts are evidence of the relationship between the victim and the defendant and may show the defendant’s motive, intent, and bent of mind in committing the act against the victim which results in the charges for which the defendant is being prosecuted.”
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “noted the sufficient probative connection between evidence of the victim [] and the defendant’s prior difficulties and the crime with which the defendant is charged. [Cits.] .. . [Although the] trial court [need not] conduct a pre-trial hearing... before evidence of prior difficulties between the defendant and the victim can be admitted at trial.. ., the admission of such evidence should be accompanied by an instruction from the trial judge explaining the limited use to which the jury may put such evidence. O’Toole v. State, 258 Ga. 614 (6) ( 373 SE2d 12 ) (1988); Kettman v. State, 257 Ga. 603 (7) ( 362 SE2d 342 ) (1987).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “the State seeks to introduce the evidence for an appropriate purpose as it tends to prove the defendant’s motive or intent, or the state of the relationship between the victim and the defendant; there is sufficient evidence that the defendant and the victim were the parties involved in the prior difficulty; and there is a sufficient connection between the prior difficulty and the crime charged.”
    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.