State v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 1 district · 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““* * * While it is true that evidence connecting the defendant with other crimes generally is not admissible, principally because it has a tendency to justify to the jury a finding of guilt irrespective of the charge on which he is being tried, it is nevertheless well established that evidence of a separate crime may be admitted if it has a reasonably close relation in scheme and pattern and in time to the act charged. The determination of whether the independent criminal acts are so closely related to the crime charged as to be admissible is a matter resting largely within the discretion of the trial court, and this court will not reverse the lower court’s ruling unless there is a clear abuse of discretion.””

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

2. ““In substance, this memorandum instructed defendant’s wife on how to prepare and condition a young woman for service as a member of their stable of prostitutes.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 342 F. Supp. 911 - Taylor v. State of Minnesota

3. ““Although there was not much substance to the defense presented, it is apparent that the defense counsel made the most of what he had to work with.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 342 F. Supp. 911 - Taylor v. State of Minnesota