State v. Pinnell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 30 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"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 or needless presentation of cumulative evidence."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Rose · State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Beasley

2. “`requires the trial judge to go through a conscious process of balancing the costs of the evidence against its benefits. Unless the judge concludes that the probative worth of the evidence is”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Beasley · 141 Or. App. 355 - State v. Rinkin

3. “"[t]hat means that, while the rule sets out a list of possible `exceptions' to the general prohibition on prior bad act evidence ('motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident'), the rule does not purport to cover every imaginable purpose to which prior bad act evidence might logically and lawfully be applied. Thus, the essential inquiry under OEC 404(3) is not whether the testimony can be made to fit into one of the listed categories, but when and how it is logically relevant to a noncharacter issue in the case."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 141 Or. App. 355 - State v. Rinkin · 240 Or. App. 338 - State v. Leistiko