State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Q And be all right again or calm? "A Right, no need for Kleen[e]x or time to recoup or anything." (Emphasis added.) Defendant argues that the emphasized testimony was inadmissible, because it was cumulative of a tape-recorded interview between Stoelk and defendant, which the state had played for the jury just before Stoelk testified. We disagree. [10] OEC 403 provides, in part, that, "[a]lthough relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by * * * considerations of * * * needless presentation of cumulative evidence." In this context, that rule requires a two-step inquiry: Whether the evidence at issue is cumulative and, if so, whether its probative value is substantially outweighed by considerations of its cumulative nature. We conclude that Stoelk's testimony was not cumulative of evidence already before the jury and, consequently, that further inquiry under OEC 403 is unnecessary. As discussed earlier in this opinion, Stoelk conducted two interviews with defendant. The first took place shortly before midnight on June 5, 1992, at the home of defendant's mother immediately following defendant's arrest. The second took place just after midnight on June 6, 1992, at the police station. Defendant also made several comments to Stoelk while being transported to the police station. Only the interview at the police station was recorded, and it was that recording that the state played for the jury. As noted above, the state asked Stoelk if, d”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Moore · State v. Isom

2. “[e]vidence that goes to the question of [a] defendant's future probable violent behavior is relevant [to] * * * the issue of future dangerousness”

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

3. “he would like to rape a `girl,' that it was something that he had thought about, and that he thought that it would be thrilling to do it,”

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