Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 35 S.W.3d 486 - State v. Evenson

State v. Evenson’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
December 2017
most recently cited

16 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Hardy v. Florida · State v. Winfield · State v. Knese · State v. Cardona-Rivera

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

  1. ““⅛ specific objection is required when the evidence is offered at trial to preserve the issue for appellate review.’” State v. Evenson, 35 S.W.3d 486, 491 (Mo. App. S. D. 2000) (quoting State v. Cardona-Rivera, 975 S.W.2d 200, 203 (Mo. App. S.D. 1998)). ‘“To preserve an objection to evidence fdr review, the objection must be specific, and the point raised on appéal must be based upon the same theory.’ ” Id.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]f for some reason the objection is untimely, then the answer should be reached by a motion to strike.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In the absence of a motion to strike or withdraw, the question of admissibility is not reviewable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.