Hamm v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 44 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be |7admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2014 Ark. App. 644 - Holland v. State · Craigg v. State

2. “This court has recognized a “pedophile exception” to Rule 404(b), which allows evidence of similar acts with the same or other children when it is helpful in showing a proclivity for a specific act with a person or class of persons with whom the defendant has an intimate relationship. Berger v. State, 343 Ark. 413 , 36 S.W.3d 286 (2001). The rationale for recognizing the exception is that such evidence helps to prove the depraved instinct of the accused. Id. The basis of the pedophile exception to Rule 404(b) is our acceptance of the notion that evidence of sexual acts with children may be shown, as that evidence demonstrates a particular proclivity or instinct. Hernandez, 331 Ark. 301 , 962 S.W.2d 756 (1998). For the pedophile exception to apply, we require that there be a sufficient degree of similarity between the evidence to be introduced and the sexual conduct of the defendant. See id; Berger, 343 Ark. 413 , 36 S.W.3d 286 . We also require that there be an “intimate relationship” between the perpetrator and the victim of the prior act. Hernandez, 331 Ark. at 308 , 962 S.W.2d at 763 ; Berger, 343 Ark. at 421 , 36 S.W.3d at 294 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. White v. State

3. “This [c]ourt has recognized a `pedophile exception' to rule 404[b], where the court has approved allowing evidence of similar acts with the same or other children when it is helpful in showing a proclivity for a specific act with a person or class of persons with whom the defendant has an intimate relationship. . . . The rationale for recognizing this exception is that such evidence helps to prove the depraved sexual instinct of the accused.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. DeJesus